Can anyone provide a quote from the Bible where it is stated that unbelievers are condemned to hell for eternal punishment?

The quote must contain the following:
1- "Unbelievers", not a word that may or not mean Unbelievers.
2- "Condemned", a euphemism meaning the exact same thing is acceptable. NOTE: "Perish", for example, does NOT have the same meaning.
3- "Hell", an equivalent word for an afterlife for unbelievers is acceptable.
4- "Eternal punishment", both words are necessary, OR an absolute equivalent.

If you believe this saying without providing proof, please explain why you believe it. Thank you.

How are "perish" and "condemned" different in meaning?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

How are "perish" and "condemned" different in meaning?

---

"Perish" means to die, cease to exist. "Condemned" means to pronounce judgement unfavorably, to censure, to sentence (often to death or life imprisonment).

So when it says in John 3:16, "so that whoever believes and trusts in Him [as Savior] shall not perish, but have eternal life," does the word "perish" in that text have the same meaning of "to die, cease to exist", so as to mean that those who do not believe in Christ are in danger of dying and ceasing to exist?

If it does, then that means our language has changed and the meaning of "perish" has narrowed over the last couple of centuries.
But I'm not so sure "perish" carries that narrow of a meaning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

So when it says in John 3:16, "so that whoever believes and trusts in Him [as Savior] shall not perish, but have eternal life," does the word "perish" in that text have the same meaning of "to die, cease to exist", so as to mean that those who do not believe in Christ are in danger of dying and ceasing to exist?

---

The meaning that you refer to - "... so that those who do not believe in Christ are in danger of dying and ceasing to exist?" is not warranted by the words in context.

The simplest explanation to your question is that the quote does not address unbelievers directly so the words cannot be used to definitively describe what happens to those who do not believe. Occam's Razor.

Secondly, there are dozens of uses of the word "perish" in the Bible. Only once does it carry the connotation of eternal punishment and that usage is clearly noted as metaphorical - i.e, not to be taken literally.

Quote:

---

The meaning that you refer to - "... so that those who do not believe in Christ are in danger of dying and ceasing to exist?" is not warranted by the words in context.

---

The text reads, "that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life." Plainly it is talking about people who are perishing who, through believing on Jesus, will have eternal life rather than perish. So who is it who is going to perish, and what does it mean that they "should not perish"? Does it mean they will cease to exist?

And if you go on to look at verse 18, Jesus changes the verb from "perish" to "judged". Same people, but a different verb, so is "perish" being used in the sense of someday facing judgement?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

...so is "perish" being used in the sense of someday facing judgement?

---

You ask a question, I reply, no acknowledgment from you, you ask another question.
I reply again, no acknowledgement from you, you go on to ask yet another question.

We've already played this game on the Current Events page.

How about you just lay out what you're trying to say and then we can all proceed from there, including any Bible scholars aboard to keep us straight.

Even better, how about just answering the question that started this thread? Thank you.

Your reply was clouded in obscurity. When you say, "The simplest explanation to your question is that the quote does not address unbelievers directly so the words cannot be used to definitively describe what happens to those who do not believe," it is a ridiculous assertion and is, in fact, no explanation at all. Belief in Jesus is the entire point of John 3:16 and is presented as the solution to perishing. So the question remains, what do you believe THIS scripture is referring to when it makes the clear reference to perishing? Why are you reluctant to answer???

The original question:

Can anyone provide a quote from the Bible where it is stated that unbelievers are condemned to hell for eternal punishment?

Essentially, it was just done. "Whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish." Now if we just think about this, the very plain implication is that those who do not believe are perishing, but through faith in Christ the perishing are rescued. Even more so when verse 18 is added. "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God's one and only Son."

Now once you figure out what it means to "perish" or to be "condemned", you'll have your answer.

Might want to refer to Rev. chapter 20 for a little help.

Perish = temporal death?
Perish = eternal death?

Eternal death = oblivion?
Eternal death = hellfire?

Would a loving God condemn to eternal death those who are mentally or psychologically or emotionally ill and can't love Him in return or love others?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Your reply was clouded in obscurity. When you say, "The simplest explanation to your question is that the quote does not address unbelievers directly so the words cannot be used to definitively describe what happens to those who do not believe," it is a ridiculous assertion and is, in fact, no explanation at all. ??

---

I suggest you look up "Occam's Razor". That may help you understand what is meant here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Would a loving God condemn to eternal death those who are mentally or psychologically or emotionally ill and can't love Him in return or love others?

---

WG, you make a very good point - the essential point. And, I would add, what about those who never heard of him?

I have never seen a rational answer to the question even after years of seeing it asked on the internet. The Catholics had something like it in a less rational time about a thousand years ago when they declared there was "no salvation outside the Catholic Church". They have long since discarded such a strange notion.

The Fundamentalists picked it up again during the late 19th century where it remains to this day believed among a handful of extreme Christians far from the mainstream.

Curiously, it is similar to fundamentalist Islamic belief in Allah where infidels are forbidden Paradise. It probably originates via a misunderstanding of the "Old Testament" Hebrew scriptures where God is portrayed as a "Jealous God".

Revealing is jlisenbe's original question on these pages where he inquires whether a woman, being a woman, is Biblically eligible for a Church position as a Sunday School leader. If a simple question like that has to be asked in the year 2018, there is not much hope that he will discard such a far stranger position as the condemnation of unbelievers to eternal punishment in hell.

I contend that the answer is to be found in the psyche of people like jlisenbe who need to strike out at a world unsatisfactory to them. This is done by assigning all others who believe differently to a horrific afterlife and, worse, to ascribe such a horrendous belief to God - in such a case, a monstrous God, hardly the loving God cited by WG.

Quote:

---

I suggest you look up "Occam's Razor". That may help you understand what is meant here.

---

Already understand the concept. It actually invalidates your idea.

Quote:

---

Revealing is jlisenbe's original question on these pages where he inquires whether a woman, being a woman, is Biblically eligible for a Church position as a Sunday School leader. If a simple question like that has to be asked in the year 2018, there is not much hope that he will discard such a far stranger position as the condemnation of unbelievers to eternal punishment in hell.

---

If you would trouble yourself for two seconds, you would find that I did not ask that question.

Unsurprisingly, you still are unwilling to answer the simple question of what is meant by "perish" and "condemn" in the context of the John 3 passage.

Your reply above reveals the problem. You want to understand scripture in light of modern day sensibilities. I try to never consider what this current culture might believe when attempting to understand scripture. Cultural beliefs come and go, but the truth of God's word will stand permanently. If that is not true, then why would anyone care what the Bible says?

Quote:

---

I contend that the answer is to be found in the psyche of people like jlisenbe who need to strike out at a world unsatisfactory to them.

---

The only person striking out at others is you. Perhaps you are frustrated at being unable to answer simple questions, or perhaps you are plainly aware of what scripture says and simply don't like it.

Quote:

---

Would a loving God condemn to eternal death those who are mentally or psychologically or emotionally ill and can't love Him in return or love others?

---

When I read your question, I immediately thought of the demon possessed man from Gadera. Still, your question is a valid one. I would think that God will judge people based upon their capabilities. None of that, of course, has any bearing on the meanings of perish and condemn.

I am convinced that the answer to many of your questions is found in the first chapter of Romans.

Why would a loving -- and omniscient -- God give mankind free will?

Will we have free will in heaven?

Why do you believe God is loving and omniscient?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Why do you believe God is loving and omniscient?

---

I used the article "a".

OK. So do you believe the God we are speaking of is loving and omniscient? If so, why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

OK. So do you believe the God we are speaking of is loving and omniscient? If so, why?

---

That's what the Bible tells us. Do I believe it? Yes. So, back to my question: Why did He give mankind free will, knowing mankind would make bad choices? Are we characters in a huge reality show? (Reminds me of the novel, New Year Island by Paul Draker.)

Quote:

---

That's what the Bible tells us. Do I believe it? Yes.

---

So can we also assume you believe that those who do not believe in Christ are condemned? John 3:18.

Not trying to be a smart aleck, but just trying to see if we can establish the Bible as our source of truth as opposed to cultural beliefs.

As to your question of free will, as I'm sure you are aware it can be a thorn patch. My conviction is that unless we humans have the option of saying "no" to God, then we really don't have a true option of saying "yes". And the ability to choose is key to love, rather like a man asking for a woman's hand in marriage. If she is being forced to say yes, then her "yes" doesn't really mean anything.

And, of course, the other side of the coin bears the sovereignty of God.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

So can we also assume you believe that those who do not believe in Christ are condemned? John 3:18.

---

But what does the Bible mean by "condemned"?

Quote:

---

Not trying to be a smart aleck, but just trying to see if we can establish the Bible as our source of truth as opposed to cultural beliefs.

---

The writers were caught in their culture and time period. They had never heard of women as CEOs, public schools, cremation, or strawberry shortcake.

Quote:

---

As to your question of free will, as I'm sure you are aware it can be a thorn patch. My conviction is that unless we humans have the option of saying "no" to God, then we really don't have a true option of saying "yes". And the ability to choose is key to love, rather like a man asking for a woman's hand in marriage. If she is being forced to say yes, then her "yes" doesn't really mean anything.

---

So your take on heaven is that we will still have free will. And it will all start all over again. (Hopefully, then, I will remember the bad choices I made the first time around, and make good ones instead.)

Quote:

---

And, of course, the other side of the coin bears the sovereignty of God.

---

I have no idea what you mean.

Quote:

---

The writers were caught in their culture and time period. They had never heard of women as CEOs, public schools, cremation, or strawberry shortcake.a

---

At some point you have to make up your mind. Either the Bible trumps the culture, or the other way around. Besides, I don't think your premise is entirely correct. Lydia had her own business and the church met in her house. Priscilla seemed to be preferred in her ministry role over her husband. The description of the "ideal woman/wife" in Proverbs 31 was given to the writer by his mother and describes a woman active in several businesses.

My comment about the sovereignty of God was meant to point out the other side of the free will/sovereignty of God debate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

At some point you have to make up your mind. Either the Bible trumps the culture, or the other way around.

---

"For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” 2 Peter 1: 21.

Those holy men encased God's truths in what they knew - desert terrain, camels, tents, kings, sheep, warfare with bows and arrows, water obtained from a well or from an unpolluted stream. Jesus cut to the chase by crossing over cultural boundaries and time periods when He said, "Love God and each other."

Quote:

---

Besides, I don't think your premise is entirely correct. Lydia had her own business and the church met in her house. Priscilla seemed to be preferred in her ministry role over her husband. The description of the "ideal woman/wife" in Proverbs 31 was given to the writer by his mother and describes a woman active in several businesses.

---

The huge majority of women stayed home. Housework and cooking were major parts of a woman's day; childcare filled in the rest. There were no modern conveniences (kitchen appliances, indoor plumbing, Wal-Mart, Hyundai Elantras) to lighten her workload. Plus, Jewish and Roman societies were patriarchies that didn't welcome women in male positions, so I'm sure those women you mention didn't have an easy time doing what they did.

Quote:

---

Those holy men encased God's truths in what they knew - desert terrain, camels, tents, kings, sheep, warfare with bows and arrows, water obtained from a well or from an unpolluted stream. Jesus cut to the chase by crossing over cultural boundaries and time periods when He said, "Love God and each other."

---

1. What you say is certainly true, but the great danger is when people use that to inject their own views into scripture. In marriage, the wife is to submit to her husband and the husband is to love his wife as Christ loved the church. Now people will say, "That is old fashioned and reflects the culture of the day." So they invalidate the Word of God and replace its teachings with their own ideas.
2. There is an enormous difference in saying that the Bible reflected the world in which the authors lived (camels, sheep, etc.) versus saying the Bible reflected the VALUES of that world culture. We must never forget how counter-cultural the New Testament was. The Gospel was preached in a day of multiple gods, sexual carelessness, marital infidelity, widespread prostitution, neglect of the poor, and a view of humanity that was only slightly above animals. The Gospel directly confronted all of that. Jesus was crucified in large part because He confronted a wicked culture.

Quote:

---

I'm sure those women you mention didn't have an easy time doing what they did.

---

90% of people lived in poverty or slavery. Life was extremely difficult for men and women both.

What does the Bible mean by "condemned"? "to pronounce to be guilty; sentence to punishment"

Quote:

---

1. What you say is certainly true, but the great danger is when people use that to inject their own views into scripture. In marriage, the wife is to submit to her husband and the husband is to love his wife as Christ loved the church. Now people will say, "That is old fashioned and reflects the culture of the day." So they invalidate the Word of God and replace its teachings with their own ideas.

---

Wives must still submit to their husbands? (This means what?) And we aren't to wear "clothing woven of two kinds of material"?

Quote:

---

The Gospel was preached in a day of multiple gods, sexual carelessness, marital infidelity, widespread prostitution, neglect of the poor, and a view of humanity that was only slightly above animals. The Gospel directly confronted all of that. Jesus was crucified in large part because He confronted a wicked culture.

---

And how is 2018 any different?

Perish = die temporally or eternally
Judged = pronounced to be either innocent or guilty
Condemned = sentenced to punishment

Quote:

---

Wives must still submit to their husbands? (This means what?) And we aren't to wear "clothing woven of two kinds of material"?

---

You see what I mean? You don't think that aligns with our culture now, so of course your cultural belief overrides scripture very clearly laid out in a number of places, Ephesians 5 being the most complete. Might add that husbands no longer need to love their wives as Christ loved the church if your reasoning is correct.

I could pull up the same issue with fidelity in marriage. That was in effect during Paul's day, but we modernists know better now. We have birth control, so there is no real reason to remain faithful to your spouse.

And the list goes on forever. It has the appearance of making yourself out to be your own Bible, and you appeal to an obscure scriptural reference that was in place only for the nation of Israel.

Perish = die temporally or eternally
Judged = pronounced to be either innocent or guilty
Condemned = sentenced to punishment

So what is your conclusion? What is the outcome for unbelievers?

I didn't make a statement; I asked you a question:

Wives must still submit to their husbands? (This means what?)

What's your definition of "submit"?

If you accept the Bible as our authority and source of truth, then why ask the question? Should we still be faithful to our spouse? Should we still tell the truth? Seems silly to me.

"Submit" would mean to respect, honor, and obey.

I note you did not ask what "love as Christ loved the church" means.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

If you accept the Bible as our authority and source of truth, then why ask the question? Should we still be faithful to our spouse? Should we still tell the truth? Seems silly to me.

"Submit" would mean to respect, honor, and obey.

---

Hmmmm, that's not what a lot of Christian fundamentalists think it means.

Quote:

---

I note you did not ask what "love as Christ loved the church" means.

---

Easy-peasy. Love even to death.

Wow. You are quick today!

Quote:

---

Hmmmm, that's not what a lot of Christian fundamentalists think it means.

---

You asked what I believe.

What is your idea about the fate of unbelievers?

Quote:

---

What is your idea about the fate of unbelievers?

---

I was taught and believed for years that unbelievers (non-Christians, in particular the non-Missouri-Synod Lutheran flavor) will suffer eternal torment in hell. I've worked with and been friends with many Jews, Muslims, Hindus, atheists, agnostics, et al. who live more God-pleasing lives than some Christians I've worked with and been friends with. So now, as someone who will face her Maker before long, I am giving a lot of thought to death and what happens afterwards. I wish Lazarus would have filled us in with a few details.

Quote:

---

many Jews, Muslims, Hindus, atheists, agnostics, et al. who live more God-pleasing lives than some Christians I've worked with and been friends with. So now, as someone who will face her Maker before long, I am giving a lot of thought to death and what happens afterwards. I wish Lazarus would have filled us in with a few details.

---

They have no faith in Christ, but they live "God-pleasing lives"? Consider this.

In Romans 3, Paul quotes several OT passages to point out that no one is "good". No one leads anything even approaching a God-pleasing life. We are all guilty. Now if we compare ourselves with ourselves, then some look better than others, but when we compare ourselves to God's standard, then we all come up pitifully short, and are all guilty. I am guilty. You are guilty. Your friends are all guilty.

We should also bear in mind that our first responsibility is to believe what God says. Above all else, that is our first job. "And this is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as he has commanded us.". Before we do anything else, we must do as God says and believe in His Son. So if a person does some good things but does not believe in Jesus, that person is not living a life pleasing to God. We cannot gain God's favor on the basis of our good works.

If you and I are swept several miles out to sea in a rip tide, we both need a lifeguard to rescue us. If you say that your hair looks nicer than mine, or I believe I can stay afloat five minutes longer than you, none of that matters. If we refuse the services of the lifeguard, we perish. If we cling to the lifeguard, we are saved. If the lifeguard rescues you first, I would hope you would yell to me, "Trust in the lifeguard! He is your only hope."

Quote:

---

in particular the non-Missouri-Synod Lutheran flavor

---

That was funny!

Athos,
It relates sort of indirectly to your question, so I offer this article for your consideration. I'm still evaluating it myself, but I'd like to hear your take.

https://corechristianity.com/resourc...ampaign=buffer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dwashbur

Athos,
It relates sort of indirectly to your question, so I offer this article for your consideration. I'm still evaluating it myself, but I'd like to hear your take.

https://corechristianity.com/resourc...ampaign=buffer

---

I will put Holton's quotes in bold italics and follow them with my own comments.

Whether it is vivid descriptions of Dante's Inferno or revivalist "hellfire and brimstone" sermons, the impression is too often given that we must go beyond biblical description to alert people to avoid such a dreadful place.

Agreed.


Hell is not horrible because of alleged implements of torture or its temperature. (After all, it is described variously in Scripture as "outer darkness" and a "lake of fire.")

Supports my position that "eternal punishment in hell for unbelievers" is not Biblical.


When our conscience condemns us, "We carry always a hell within us" (Gen. Epp. 167).

Similar to my contention that the false proposition originates within the believer himself, and reflects being on the social margins.


We are not entitled, much less required, in our present condition to defend the doctrine of eternal punishment in any way that either exceeds Scripture or reflects a perverse delight in damnation.

Perfectly stated, and my position in a nutshell.


Sorry for such a long response time - Christmas and all that.

Hi Athos,
I see all those descriptions - fire, darkness, chains, weeping, etc. as attempts to describe the indescribable.

And considering that Dante's Inferno was a blatantly political piece, I'm not sure how much theology we should try to get out of it.

After more than a month and nearly 700 views, there have been no answers to the original question. The conclusion is that the proposition that unbelievers are condemned to hell for eternal punishment is not Biblical.

It is hoped that this false pernicious philosophy will someday no longer be promoted by anyone.

Answers, yes. Answers that you are prepared to accept? No. Revelation 20 has the answer as does John 3:16. "Perish" has to mean to endure punishment unless a person believes, as you seem to do, that it means to simply cease to exist, which has no support in the Bible. "It is appointed unto man once to die, and then the judgement."

But we must consider this. A person can be wrong about the day of judgement (and I could be that person), and yet still be alright so long as he/she is right on the subject of faith in Christ as the source of salvation. I'm sure we will all "sit around" in heaven some day discussing how we had it wrong on this or that, but no one will discuss how they had it wrong about the necessity of faith in Jesus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Answers, yes. Answers that you are prepared to accept? No. Revelation 20 has the answer as does John 3:16. "Perish" has to mean to endure punishment unless a person believes, as you seem to do, that it means to simply cease to exist, which has no support in the Bible. "It is appointed unto man once to die, and then the judgement."

But we must consider this. A person can be wrong about the day of judgement (and I could be that person), and yet still be alright so long as he/she is right on the subject of faith in Christ as the source of salvation. I'm sure we will all "sit around" in heaven some day discussing how we had it wrong on this or that, but no one will discuss how they had it wrong about the necessity of faith in Jesus.

---

Revelation 20 and John 3:16 are not concerned with the question starting this thread. Please read the question.

As to "perish" - there is error here, also. I won't post any links since I'm informed you don't read them, but here is a quote from one of those links - "As to any secondary meanings of perish, NONE even remotely express the theory of endless torment." Dr. Weymouth. Try Googling.

As to your "no support in the Bible", error #3. The word "perish" is found in the Bible many times where it means "die, kill, destroyed, consumed, slain, being eat up, laid waste, go to nothing, be as nothing, vanish, withereth, cut off, turn again unto dust, deceased, fade away and utterly wasted". Never your meaning of eternal punishment. Please don't quote the Bible with untruths. Googling can take you to many excellent Bible websites.


Your second paragraph posits a new question. Would you like to discuss that one, too?

If you would simply continue to read the John passage, Jesus elaborates on John 3:16 by saying, "He who believes in Him is not condemned. But he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." Now the word "condemned" has the meaning of incurring judgement, and it very plainly refers to those who are unbelievers.

The Amplified version renders the passage in this manner. "18 He who believes in Him [who clings to, trusts in, relies on Him] is not judged [he who trusts in Him never comes up for judgment; for him there is no rejection, no condemnation—he incurs no damnation]; but he who does not believe (cleave to, rely on, trust in Him) is judged already [he has already been convicted and has already received his sentence] because he has not believed in and trusted in the name of the only begotten Son of God. [He is condemned for refusing to let his trust rest in Christ’s name.]19 The [basis of the] judgment (indictment, the test by which men are judged, the ground for the sentence) lies in this: the Light has come into the world, and people have loved the darkness rather than and more than the Light, for their works (deeds) were evil."

You never have told us what you believe the outcome for unbelievers will be. What do you think "perish" refers to?

BTW, your original question was, "Can anyone provide a quote from the Bible where it is stated that unbelievers are condemned to hell for eternal punishment?". John 3:16 and Rev. 20 are both quite concerned with that question. In fact. Revelation 20 directly addresses it.