(posted by jlsnbe Nov 10. I said I'd get back to him. This can be moved to Christianity if desired.)



Matthew 25:41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink,43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”





The topic is “Unbelievers are condemned to eternal punishment in hell”. This is the belief of a small group of fundamentalist Christians. As promised, here is my statement in opposition to this belief.


It is absurd on its face. The Jesus who said Love Your Enemy would hardly condemn those enemies he loved to eternal punishment in hell. Other sayings of Jesus supporting the erroneous belief are shown to be misunderstandings of one or more of the necessary conditions or mistranslations. I won't go over them again because they have been done to death in previous posts.


Matthew 25. The relevant portion is “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, the righteous to eternal life”. The context can be read in the post above. Jesus is clearly not addressing unbelievers. In fact, he is addressing those who are believers but have failed to carry out those things (works) required of believers.


The Greek word aionios is used in this verse to signify everlasting and is also used in this verse to signify an age – a period of time. The correct reading is “And these will go away to an age (a period of time) of punishment, and the righteous to eternal life.” Also, and importantly, the Greek word kolasis used in this verse means “corrective punishment” - not eternal punishment.

Why the two different uses of the same word? The word aionios has two meanings – eternal and an age (a limited period of time). The mistranslated verse first appears in the 5^th century in Jerome's Latin Vulgate. The mistranslation has been copied ever since in the KJV and other Bibles.

For those interested, see Young's Concordance, et al.

You just couldn't let it go, could you?

You can't argue your way out of it, either you believe or you don't. If you don't, and you know the argument, you condemn yourself

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vacuum7

You just couldn't let it go, could you?

---

I fulfill my promises.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

You can't argue your way out of it, either you believe or you don't. If you don't, and you know the argument, you condemn yourself

---

Well, that's a cute argument. If I don't believe, I condemn myself. Some things here haven't changed a bit - Fascist Christianity is always with us.

once again you twist the truth to hear what you want to hear

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

once again you twist the truth to hear what you want to hear

---

Exactly how was the truth twisted? Or is this just another bit of nuttiness from you?

Quoting only opinions that seem to agree with you doesn't do anythink for you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

Quoting only opinions that seem to agree with you doesn't do anythink for you

---

Not my agreement. but scholarly consensus. This is an area of exegesis you're probably not familiar with. After all, why bother with the truth when you've already decided how and what to believe handed down to you from already ill-informed "believers".

Thank you - whoever moved this from Current Events. This is a much better page even though Current Events was where this thread began.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

(posted by jlsnbe Nov 10. I said I'd get back to him. This can be moved to Christianity if desired.)



Matthew 25:41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink,43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”





The topic is “Unbelievers are condemned to eternal punishment in hell”. This is the belief of a small group of fundamentalist Christians. As promised, here is my statement in opposition to this belief.


It is absurd on its face. The Jesus who said Love Your Enemy would hardly condemn those enemies he loved to eternal punishment in hell. Other sayings of Jesus supporting the erroneous belief are shown to be misunderstandings of one or more of the necessary conditions or mistranslations. I won't go over them again because they have been done to death in previous posts.


Matthew 25. The relevant portion is “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, the righteous to eternal life”. The context can be read in the post above. Jesus is clearly not addressing unbelievers. In fact, he is addressing those who are believers but have failed to carry out those things (works) required of believers.


The Greek word aionios is used in this verse to signify everlasting and is also used in this verse to signify an age – a period of time. The correct reading is “And these will go away to an age (a period of time) of punishment, and the righteous to eternal life.” Also, and importantly, the Greek word kolasis used in this verse means “corrective punishment” - not eternal punishment.

Why the two different uses of the same word? The word aionios has two meanings – eternal and an age (a limited period of time). The mistranslated verse first appears in the 5^th century in Jerome's Latin Vulgate. The mistranslation has been copied ever since in the KJV and other Bibles.

For those interested, see Young's Concordance, et al.

---

I've given jlsnbe a month to reply. I will take a lack of reply as agreement. He is to be congratulated for changing his mind, and warned not to backslide promoting again his pernicious doctrine of a monstrous Jesus - especially to children.

Just now saw this. You gave me a month. I took twenty minutes.

Quote:

---

It is absurd on its face. The Jesus who said Love Your Enemy would hardly condemn those enemies he loved to eternal punishment in hell.

---

Except that condemning people to hell is exactly what He is warning us of in the passage. So you're saying that to believe what the passage says is absurd. That statement would seem to be plainly absurd.

Quote:

---

Other sayings of Jesus supporting the erroneous belief are shown to be misunderstandings of one or more of the necessary conditions or mistranslations. I won't go over them again because they have been done to death in previous posts.

---

Which ones?

As to the rest of your analysis, even if I was prepared to accept your ideas, and I am not, can you point to a single translation of the Bible that adopts your view? A quick check on my part showed that the NASB, ESV, Amp, Wyc, and NIV do not follow your lead. They are all very clear. So I am in the position of having to adopt your view, based, it would seem, upon a prejudiced position, or the translations of hundreds of scholars who are fluent in NT Greek and have spent a lifetime looking into the matter. They do not agree with you. For me, that settles the matter.

But even if I was willing to accept your lone interpretation, it would still mean that people are going to be cast into the fire of hell for some relatively long period of time for, as you said, "corrective" punishment. But punishment does not change the heart, and it is the heart that God looks at. Nonetheless, even your translation leaves hell as a very real place to which Jesus is going to send people for a long period of time. Even your view establishes hell as a very real and terrible place.

Jesus is not telling us that people must work to be saved. That would contradict the rest of the Bible. He is saying that those who have a genuine faith in Christ will, as a fruit of His presence in their lives, perform good works. An absence of good works shows an absence of Jesus.

For further clarity, you can refer to Matt. 13:50; 10:28; 18:8,9; Luke 3:17; 12:5; 13:27,28; 17:19ff. You can also refer to Rev. 20:11ff; 21:8, 2 Thes. 1:9, Mark 9:43, Jude 1:7, and 2 Peter 3ff.

Strong's translation of "kolasis" is as follows: "chastisement, punishment, torment, perhaps with the idea of deprivation." That does not agree with your view as being purely corrective.

Your contention that the punishment of hell is a doctrine believed by some small set of fundamentalists is simply wrong. It is a central belief of evangelical Christianity, and is believed by the Catholic Church as well. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: “The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, ‘eternal fire.’ The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs." I am not a Catholic, but that sure seems pretty clear.

You are free to not believe in hell if you wish. I have no intention of forcing my beliefs on you or anyone else. You are even free to adopt your (in my view) erroneous interpretation of Matthew 25. I don't think you are free to ask to be taken seriously when you basically say that the hundreds and thousands of serious scholars who translated the Bible got it wrong, but you, basically an amateur, got it right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Except that condemning people to hell is exactly what He is warning us of in the passage. So you're saying that to believe what the passage says is absurd. That statement would seem to be plainly absurd. You are free to not believe in hell if you wish. ....... but you, basically an amateur, got it right.

---

You have completely misconstrued my position regarding the topic at hand. It was always about UNBELIEVERS. UNBELIEVERS, get it? Your long diatribe here conveniently ignores that part.

Calling someone an amateur is an argument ad hominem. You're good at that. Attributing arguments to me that I have never made is another logical fallacy.

Based on the evidence of your posts in these pages, you exhibit a mean-spiritedness and an ignorance of the essential Biblical message. Like many fundamentalists, you miss the main point of the Bible seeing only the trees and never the forest.

Many words but no real response, so I'll ask again.

1. How is it that nearly every translation does not accept your definition of aionios?
2. Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage, that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?
3. What was your view of these scriptures? Matt. 13:50; 10:28; 18:8,9; Luke 3:17; 12:5; 13:27,28; 17:19ff. You can also refer to Rev. 20:11ff; 21:8, 2 Thes. 1:9, Mark 9:43, Jude 1:7, and 2 Peter 3ff.
4. Based upon what Strong's concordance had to say about "kolasis", do you think you missed it with your interpretation of the word?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Many words but no real response, so I'll ask again.

---

Do you believe unbelievers are sentenced to hell for eternal punishment?

That baby you saved from abortion grows up to be an unbeliever and you believe the grown-up is sentenced to hell for eternal punishment? The grandmother in the rice paddy in China helping to feed her family and who never heard of Jesus Christ - does she also go to hell for eternal punishment?

I thought if you don't hear it from the person yourself, it's hearsay, second hand account.

Quote:

---

Do you believe unbelievers are sentenced to hell for eternal punishment?

That baby you saved from abortion grows up to be an unbeliever and you believe the grown-up is sentenced to hell for eternal punishment? The grandmother in the rice paddy in China helping to feed her family and who never heard of Jesus Christ - does she also go to hell for eternal punishment?

---

As usual, you have no answers to questions. You just seem so fearful. Why is that?

For me, in reply to your question, I will stick with the clear teaching of the Bible shown by the many scriptures I referenced which show, without question, that faith in Jesus is the only escape from the judgement of God which quite rightly falls upon sinners and which, quite rightly, would have fallen upon me had it not been for Jesus. John 3:14-17 is such a wonderful passage and teaches the saving ministry of Christ very plainly.

Here is a passage from Exodus 12 for your consideration concerning God's judgement. "12“On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn of both people and animals, and I will bring judgment on all the gods of Egypt. I am the Lord. 13The blood will be a sign for you on the houses where you are, and when I see the blood, I will pass over you. No destructive plague will touch you when I strike Egypt."

I still have my four questions. It would show some courage for you to answer them.

1. How is it that nearly every translation does not accept your definition of aionios?
2. Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage, that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?
3. What was your view of these scriptures? Matt. 13:50; 10:28; 18:8,9; Luke 3:17; 12:5; 13:27,28; 17:19ff. You can also refer to Rev. 20:11ff; 21:8, 2 Thes. 1:9, Mark 9:43, Jude 1:7, and 2 Peter 3ff.
4. Based upon what Strong's concordance had to say about "kolasis", do you think you missed it with your interpretation of the word?

There is also this passage from Romans 3. "2 As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh[a] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. 4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast."

And this from Ephesians 2. "As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh[a] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. 4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God."

Quote:

---

I thought if you don't hear it from the person yourself, it's hearsay, second hand account.

---

Actually that's not the case. It's hearsay when I claim I heard another person tell me what a third party said. Direct testimony is when I say I heard the person say it himself.

Oh! Okay!

I wish we had some emojis on this site. I'd give you a "thumbs up".

tal -- I thought if you don't hear it from the person yourself, it's hearsay, second hand account.

JL --

Quote:

---

Actually that's not the case. It's hearsay when I claim I heard another person tell me what a third party said. Direct testimony is when I say I heard the person say it himself.

---

Are you two saying the same thing?
Jim -> Mike -> Rob = hearsay
Jim -> Mike = direct testimony

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

tal -- I thought if you don't hear it from the person yourself, it's hearsay, second hand account.

JL --

Are you two saying the same thing?
Jim -> Mike -> Rob = hearsay
Jim -> Mike = direct testimony

---

I don't think we are WG since my post applies to the court of public opinion concerning the bible, not the LAW, so you BELIEVE it or not. YOUR choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

...faith in Jesus is the only escape from the judgement of God which quite rightly falls upon sinners ...

---

To repeat, for the umpteenth time - the topic is UNBELIEVERS ARE CONDEMNED TO HELL FOR ETERNAL PUNISHMENT. Your comment does NOT address the topic.

Quote:

---

Here is a passage from Exodus 12 for your consideration concerning God's judgement. "...I will pass through Egypt and ...bring judgment on all the gods of Egypt. I am the Lord...."

---

Not a single word about hell and/or eternal punishment there for unbelievers.

Quote:

---

Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage, that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?

---

This a far cry from your original contention that UNBELIEVERS GO TO HELL FOR ETERNAL PUNISHMENT. Now, instead of "eternal punishment", you have substituted "some period of time". Not exactly eternal, is it?

I have already replied to the many scriptures you have provided over the time of this discussion. NOT A SINGLE ONE CLAIMS ETERNAL PUNISHMENT IN HELL FOR UNBELIEVERS.

Quote:

---

There is also this passage from Romans 3. "2 As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of ..." etc etc etc.

---

This long excerpt does NOT mention UNBELIEVERS, HELL, or ETERNAL PUNISHMENT. You are really getting off the track here.

Quote:

---

And this from Ephesians 2. "As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. ....

---

This is pretty much identical to your previous quote from Romans. My response is also pretty much identical - not a single word about eternal punishment, or hell, or condemnation of unbelievers.

It is time for you to admit that you were wrong about unbelievers being condemned to hell for eternal punishment. I do not doubt your believing it, I disagree with your contention that such a doctrine is part of Christianity. Almost twenty times now I have shown where you have misread the Bible. I have done this in black and white on these pages, yet you refuse to acknowledge the evidence of your eyes.

I am tired of your constant replies that question my beliefs (irrelevant), go off on tangents that don't address the issue (irrelevant), and just generally distract and divert to avoid coming to grips with the issue (irrelevant).

Quote:

---

It is time for you to admit that you were wrong about unbelievers being condemned to hell for eternal punishment. I do not doubt your believing it, I disagree with your contention that such a doctrine is part of Christianity. Almost twenty times now I have shown where you have misread the Bible. I have done this in black and white on these pages, yet you refuse to acknowledge the evidence of your eyes.

I am tired of your constant replies that question my beliefs (irrelevant), go off on tangents that don't address the issue (irrelevant), and just generally distract and divert to avoid coming to grips with the issue (irrelevant).

---

I don't really care what you're tired of. If you don't like this conversation, then find something else to do. The Romans passage (chapters 2 and 3), the John 3 passage, the Matthew 25 passage, they are all very clear in addition to the ten or so others I listed. The importance of the Romans passage is the fact that it declares all people to be under judgement because of sin, and then presents faith in Jesus as the sole source of deliverance. Now you can accept that or reject it. Your choice.

As is normal for you, you didn't answer any questions, so I'll repeat them.

I still have my four questions. It would show some courage for you to answer them.

1. How is it that nearly every translation does not accept your definition of aionios?
2. Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage, that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?
3. What was your view of these scriptures? Matt. 13:50; 10:28; 18:8,9; Luke 3:17; 12:5; 13:27,28; 17:19ff. You can also refer to Rev. 20:11ff; 21:8, 2 Thes. 1:9, Mark 9:43, Jude 1:7, and 2 Peter 3ff.
4. Based upon what Strong's concordance had to say about "kolasis", do you think you missed it with your interpretation of the word?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

The importance of the Romans passage is the fact that it declares all people to be under judgement because of sin, and then presents faith in Jesus as the sole source of deliverance.

---

Perfect example of what you don't understand. NOWHERE IN THAT PASSAGE DOES IT REFER TO ETERNAL PUNISHMENT IN HELL. Yo are putting that in to conform to your error.

As far as including "all people" which you're implying includes unbelievers, tell me this. How in the world could those who never heard of Jesus - before he lived, during his lifetime, and after he lived - could possibly have faith in Jesus as the "sole source of deliverance"? God gave you a brain. Use it, man. The writer is obviously using a figure of speech, never intending the whole human race who ever lived needing to believe in Jesus.

I did not say it referred to punishment in hell. I said it concluded that all were under judgement.

As to answering a question, which I have been doing consistently with you, it's your turn now. I'll repeat my four questions. In the interest of displaying some level of honesty and openness, you should at least take a shot at two or three of them.

1. How is it that nearly every translation does not accept your definition of aionios?
2. Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage, that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?
3. What was your view of these scriptures? Matt. 13:50; 10:28; 18:8,9; Luke 3:17; 12:5; 13:27,28; 17:19ff. You can also refer to Rev. 20:11ff; 21:8, 2 Thes. 1:9, Mark 9:43, Jude 1:7, and 2 Peter 3ff.
4. Based upon what Strong's concordance had to say about "kolasis", do you think you missed it with your interpretation of the word?

In fact, a really good way to discuss these issues is by "answer a question, and then ask a question". So if you can at least answer one of them, which would be kind of minimal, then maybe we could get some order in this discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I did not say it referred to punishment in hell. I said it concluded that all were under judgement.

---

Irrelevant. It is NOT the topic under discussion.

Quote:

---

As to answering a question, which I have been doing consistently with you,

---

Too funny. You have yet to address the simple subject of unbelievers condemned to hell for eternal punishment. Your so-called "answers" are Bible quotes as if you have no mind of your own. And you are anything but consistent - you're all over the place with your replies.

Quote:

---

I'll repeat my four questions. In the interest of displaying some level of honesty and openness, you should at least take a shot at two or three of them. ................ In fact, a really good way to discuss these issues is by "answer a question, and then ask a question". So if you can at least answer one of them, which would be kind of minimal, then maybe we could get some order in this discussion.

---

I have no problem with your starting a new thread with your questions. Who knows? You may generate some interest. In the interest of displaying honesty, I suggest you reply in a straightforward manner and not keep trying to divert the discussion.

My favorite diversion of yours was your long post from the Catholic Catechism on hell. You seem to think this discussion is about the existence of hell. It's not.

For your information, the Catholic Church has declared that they make NO claim that ANYONE is in hell. Also, as to unbelievers., the Church has equally declared that UNBELIEVERS do NOT go to hell because of their unbelief. In fact, the Church recognizes the good found in all religions, whether believers or not, although it retains itself as the Church possessing the "fullness" of revelation.

As usual, too afraid to answer questions.

I am not Catholic and don't really care what the Catholic Church says. In addition, I don't really trust what you say after the debacle with your contention about Aquinas' statement on the subject of those who die never having heard the Gospel. You completely misrepresented his views by using only a small section of his writing when the complete quote clearly showed that he had a different perspective.

Maybe you will develop the courage to answer questions someday. I'll post them again just in case. 1 and 4 are particularly pertinent since they call into open question your knowledge of Greek and your mistaken view of the meanings of the two words. Question 1 in particular completely destroys your explanation of Matthew 25 which remains a huge roadblock to your position.

1. How is it that nearly every translation does not accept your definition of aionios?
2. Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage, that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?
3. What was your view of these scriptures? Matt. 13:50; 10:28; 18:8,9; Luke 3:17; 12:5; 13:27,28; 17:19ff. You can also refer to Rev. 20:11ff; 21:8, 2 Thes. 1:9, Mark 9:43, Jude 1:7, and 2 Peter 3ff.
4. Based upon what Strong's concordance had to say about "kolasis", do you think you missed it with your interpretation of the word?

It would be desirable for you to not reply again until you are willing to enter into an open and honest discussion by answering questions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

As usual, too afraid to answer questions.

---

This has become a mantra with you. Good way to deflect from the issue. I'm not surprised.

Quote:

---

I am not Catholic and don't really care what the Catholic Church says.

---

Wow, you sure could have fooled me when you took such time and effort to quote the CC catechism!

Quote:

---

your contention about Aquinas' statement on the subject of those who die never having heard the Gospel. You completely misrepresented his views by using only a small section of his writing when the complete quote clearly showed that he had a different perspective.

---

I'm satisfied with my years of studying and reading Aquinas as opposed to your three minutes on Wikipedia.

Quote:

---

Maybe you will develop the courage to answer questions someday.

---

You have this thing on courage. That's simply your way of evading the issue. You're completely transparent.

Quote:

---

Question 1 in particular completely destroys your explanation of Matthew 25 which remains a huge roadblock to your position.

---

Who's the amateur now? Your understanding of the Bible is from your childhood. You were given a fundamentalist take and you have never really examined your belief. That's not uncommon for people who believe as you do. There's a fear factor at work here (speaking or courage or the lack of it) that is difficult to overcome. You'll never grow in your faith unless you confront that fear.

Put away the things of childhood and examine the proposition using your God-given wisdom factory. The God of the Bible certainly doesn't condemn his creature to eternal torment for the simple act of never having heard of Jesus. I'm shocked that you can't understand that even after I pointed out how the Bible verses you provided were not what you had hoped. Unfortunately, the Good Book has often been misused for evil purposes.

That would make for a monstrous Deity. Is God the author of evil? That's what your belief is promoting.

Quote:

---

It would be desirable for you to not reply again

---

Lol. Giving up, eh? That's what you dearly desire, isn't it? But you're too rich a source of misinformation to ignore.

It's a mantra because it is so true. You are still too scared to answer questions. Sad. Your discussion of Aquinas was disgraceful. You intentionally, I think, attempted to misrepresent his position with your selective quote. When I put the quote in full, it completely destroyed your view.

This is all you'll see from me until you get your courage up and enter into a genuine discussion.

Maybe you will develop the courage to answer questions someday. I'll post them again just in case. 1 and 4 are particularly pertinent since they call into open question your knowledge of Greek and your mistaken view of the meanings of the two words. Question 1 in particular completely destroys your explanation of Matthew 25 which remains a huge roadblock to your position.

1. How is it that nearly every translation does not accept your definition of aionios?
2. Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage, that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?
3. What was your view of these scriptures? Matt. 13:50; 10:28; 18:8,9; Luke 3:17; 12:5; 13:27,28; 17:19ff. You can also refer to Rev. 20:11ff; 21:8, 2 Thes. 1:9, Mark 9:43, Jude 1:7, and 2 Peter 3ff.
4. Based upon what Strong's concordance had to say about "kolasis", do you think you missed it with your interpretation of the word?

It would be desirable for you to not reply again until you are willing to enter into an open and honest discussion by answering questions. Courage is now the watchword for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

It would be desirable for you to not reply again until you are willing to enter into an open and honest discussion by answering questions. Courage is now the watchword for you.

---

It's the same tired tune from you - you simply will not answer the question re unbelievers going to hell. You pose questions, not to find the truth but to divert and obscure. Every one of your Bible verses has previously been answered by me. If you need to see them again, check the archives.

You've been running all your life from the truth, but you can't hide from the truth. Sooner or later, it will catch up to you.

This is all you'll see from me until you get your courage up and enter into a genuine discussion.

Maybe you will develop the courage to answer questions someday. I'll post them again just in case. 1 and 4 are particularly pertinent since they call into open question your knowledge of Greek and your mistaken view of the meanings of the two words. Question 1 in particular completely destroys your explanation of Matthew 25 which remains a huge roadblock to your position.

1. How is it that nearly every translation does not accept your definition of aionios?
2. Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage, that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?
3. What was your view of these scriptures? Matt. 13:50; 10:28; 18:8,9; Luke 3:17; 12:5; 13:27,28; 17:19ff. You can also refer to Rev. 20:11ff; 21:8, 2 Thes. 1:9, Mark 9:43, Jude 1:7, and 2 Peter 3ff.
4. Based upon what Strong's concordance had to say about "kolasis", do you think you missed it with your interpretation of the word?

It would be desirable for you to not reply again until you are willing to enter into an open and honest discussion by answering questions. Courage is now the watchword for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

This is all you'll see from me until you get your courage up and enter into a genuine discussion.

---

I think you already said that. Getting a bit confused, are we?

Keep running away - that's what you do best.

This is all you'll see from me until you get your courage up and enter into a genuine discussion.

Maybe you will develop the courage to answer questions someday. I'll post them again just in case. 1 and 4 are particularly pertinent since they call into open question your knowledge of Greek and your mistaken view of the meanings of the two words. Question 1 in particular completely destroys your explanation of Matthew 25 which remains a huge roadblock to your position.

1. How is it that nearly every translation does not accept your definition of aionios?
2. Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage, that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?
3. What was your view of these scriptures? Matt. 13:50; 10:28; 18:8,9; Luke 3:17; 12:5; 13:27,28; 17:19ff. You can also refer to Rev. 20:11ff; 21:8, 2 Thes. 1:9, Mark 9:43, Jude 1:7, and 2 Peter 3ff.
4. Based upon what Strong's concordance had to say about "kolasis", do you think you missed it with your interpretation of the word?

It would be desirable for you to not reply again until you are willing to enter into an open and honest discussion by answering questions. Courage is now the watchword for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

This is all you'll see from me until you get your courage up and enter into a genuine discussion.

Maybe you will develop the courage to answer questions someday. I'll post them again just in case. 1 and 4 are particularly pertinent since they call into open question your knowledge of Greek and your mistaken view of the meanings of the two words. Question 1 in particular completely destroys your explanation of Matthew 25 which remains a huge roadblock to your position.

1. How is it that nearly every translation does not accept your definition of aionios?
2. Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage, that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?
3. What was your view of these scriptures? Matt. 13:50; 10:28; 18:8,9; Luke 3:17; 12:5; 13:27,28; 17:19ff. You can also refer to Rev. 20:11ff; 21:8, 2 Thes. 1:9, Mark 9:43, Jude 1:7, and 2 Peter 3ff.
4. Based upon what Strong's concordance had to say about "kolasis", do you think you missed it with your interpretation of the word?

It would be desirable for you to not reply again until you are willing to enter into an open and honest discussion by answering questions. Courage is now the watchword for you.

---

I think you already said that. Getting a bit confused, are we?

Keep running away - that's what you do best.

Had an inspiration this morning. Since you are unwilling to answer the questions, I'll answer them for you.

Quote:

---

1. How is it that nearly every translation does not accept your definition of aionios?

---

There is no real reply for that. Your definition of "aionios" is clearly incorrect, and since your entire exposition of the Matt. 25 passage hinged on that, then it falls completely apart. You still are faced with Jesus sending people to an eternal, fiery hell. But even if you had been correct, and you very much were not, then it would mean that heaven would also be merely temporary since the same word used to describe hell is used to describe heaven. It is a devastating and irrational mistake.

Quote:

---

2. Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage, that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?

---

You would have to agree with that. Of course it is now a moot point since the temporary nature of that situation has been removed in question 1.

Quote:

---

3. What was your view of these scriptures? Matt. 13:50; 10:28; 18:8,9; Luke 3:17; 12:5; 13:27,28; 17:19ff. You can also refer to Rev. 20:11ff; 21:8, 2 Thes. 1:9, Mark 9:43, Jude 1:7, and 2 Peter 3ff.

---

It is an overwhelming avalanche that clearly shows a terrible day of judgement by God upon sinners is coming and that there is no escape aside from the wonderful ministry of Christ. I might add, as I have done on several occasions, that people are not judged for unbelief. They are judged for sin. That is very clear in Matt. 25. We are not going to be judged for unbelief, but we can be saved by faith in the powerful work of Jesus, a truth that is repeated almost endlessly in the NT. That is one of the wonderful effects of the Gospel, that no Christian can claim superiority over anyone else since we are saved by the action of another and not by our own goodness or good works.

Quote:

---

4. Based upon what Strong's concordance had to say about "kolasis", do you think you missed it with your interpretation of the word?

---

Absolutely. You cannot appeal to a definition which is very much a minority one and which plainly does not fit the context of the passage.

So you see that you are still stuck in Mattew 25. Your attempt at an end run has failed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

... people are not judged for unbelief. They are judged for sin. That is very clear in Matt. 25. We are not going to be judged for unbelief,

---

HALLELUJAH!!!!!!! FINALLY!!!!! You have dropped your belief that unbelievers are condemned to hell for eternal punishment!


Well, it's all water under the bridge now. You are to be congratulated.

Go in peace.

Quote:

---

HALLELUJAH!!!!!!! FINALLY!!!!! You have dropped your belief that unbelievers are condemned to hell for eternal punishment!

---

You have such a short memory. We've gone through all of this before, but considering your limitations I'll run it by you again. God judges sinners. Those with saving faith in Christ are saved from judgement, Christ having already received their judgement. So who is left? Now if we think even a few seconds about that, it is plain that the unbelievers (non-believers, those absent faith) are left. So yes, unbelievers are condemned to hell, but not because of the unbelief, but rather because of sin.

Can you understand that now?

Still too fearful to answer questions? That's really a mystery to me. You love to ask questions, but are so reluctant to answer them. Seems cowardly to me, but perhaps I am wrong.

Your Matt. 25 problem remains.

Does "unbeliever" mean one who has heard the Gospel but refuses, despite multiple efforts by loving and patient Christians, to believe?

Yet, I was taught "I believe that I cannot by my own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to Him; but the Holy Spirit has called me by the Gospel, enlightened me with His gifts, sanctified and kept me in the true faith." Salvation is the work of God and not man. Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

God judges sinners. Those with saving faith in Christ are saved from judgement, Christ having already received their judgement. So who is left? Now if we think even a few seconds about that, it is plain that the unbelievers (non-believers, those absent faith) are left. So yes, unbelievers are condemned to hell, but not because of the unbelief, but rather because of sin.

---

Ahh, and you were doing so well.

There's one small flaw in your logic. You are equating unbelievers with sinners. You have no way of knowing whether unbelievers are sinners or not. Please spare me Bible verses that you interpret as "all" being sinners.

And, of course, how does a newborn baby sin?

Oh no. I'm equating EVERYONE with sinners. You, me, WG, Tal, Vac, and everyone else. "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." "All we like sheep have gone astray. Each of us has turned to his own way, and the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall upon Him." So you see it's no flaw at all, and not even a small one.

Spare the Bible verses? That's actually your territory.

I am not aware if the Bible directly addresses the issue of newborns, but it would seem reasonable that they are incapable of sin until some later period in life.

I still want to know your view of the near unanimous rejection in Bible translations of your view of aionios. Notice I put that in the form of a statement so as not to cause you any undue anxiety.

Quote:

---

"Yet, I was taught "I believe that I cannot by my own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to Him; but the Holy Spirit has called me by the Gospel, enlightened me with His gifts, sanctified and kept me in the true faith." Salvation is the work of God and not man. Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile."

---

WG, you say you were taught that. Do you believe it? Do you accept the clause, "to everyone who believes"?