So all your saying is that you base your understanding or interpretation of hell on a parable and a very symbolic book.
I call it the word of God. 2 Tim 3:16.
Oops, I didn’t see page 2 so my comment was out of context-- I removed it.
Hey Aaron!
Way to go! I thought you knew your way around the Bible, and on the references I suggested as hints of developments beyond death, you nailed all four! You do realize that your response focused ONLY on what I said deserves hardly any weight, and not at all on what I argued most clearly requires that God can work beyond this world. But as usual, you express personal certitude even about the meaning of passages that most scholars find cryptic and difficult. So I will answer you.
-
On I Peter 3,4: You assert that the Gospel Jesus preached to the dead was to those who were repentant in the O.T., but who now have accepted salvation. But the text only describes them as ***“the disobedient”***, and does not indicate the result of Jesus preaching to them. Thus, out of dozens of theories I’ve read on this, yours seems especially unlikely. And claiming that Jesus’ ascension in Eph. 4 describes this seems equally fanciful. Isn’t it far more likely that the “disbedient” were espcially NOT those who had made a righteous response?
-
On 1 Cor. 15:29: You claim Paul argues Christians should believe in the resurrection because pagans baptized their dead! Wouldn’t that be a totally unconvincing way to bring Christians to faith? Yet you insist pagans believed in the resurrection of the dead, which they did NOT. Paul couldn’t say “we” as you demand, because while scholars agree that the Corintihian church was baptizing for the dead, Paul did not. So I can see no Scriptural basis for even one element among your couter-arguments.
-
On Rev. 22:17’s invitation to receive Christ’s gift of living water, you seem to grant that it appears in the text after the LoF is presented, but your argue that really only applies to those who live before these later events. I do agree that it could be read that way. But wouldn’t the placement of this invitation seem far less confusing if it is consistent with Revelation’s pictures that kings and nation, up to the end described as rebels, well be “healed” by Jesus’ living water that flows out to where the LoF is, thus fulfilling 5:13’s vision that “every creature” everywhere will offer “praise” to the Lamb?
-
You just assert that 1 Cor. 15 is “Not a post-mortem salvation.” IF Ijust assert that it IS, would we cancel each others’ assertions out**?** The only way to evalulate this is to look at the Bible text itself! Doesn’t my interpretation sound more like chapter 15’s when all are “under Christ,” God will have become “all in everyone,” than your view that most folk will remain in hell where God won’t be IN them at ALL?
You conclude 7 texts describe God’s “judgements” as "final." But I find that that term as a description of the judgment is simply completely absent. I appears to look like making an addition of man’s ideas to the Bible.
In summary, your explanations of these ‘hint’ passages are so unconvincing that I fear I have been mistaken to place so little weight on them. In my experience, there are far more substantial difficulties with universalism that you should advance so that its’ adherents won’t be over-confident.
Blessings,
Bob
Hello Bob
-
Both the OT righteous and unrighteous were in Hades in different sections.Luke 16:19-31. I agree, Jesus did preach to the “disobedient” the ones who I believed who actually repented during the flood and died( they all did not repent but I believe some did). Both the OT righteous and the unrighteous needed to receive the spiritual life when you accept Jesus as Lord and Savior…in their case the Messiah. When they received this spirtual life they were now able to go to heaven with Jesus and He took them with him in Eph 4:8. This will not happen again.
-
You misunderstood me, Bob. The Corinthian church were heavily influenced by pagan doctrine. (this was the predominate religion before converting to Christianity) If the Corinthian church were practicing baptizing the dead it came from their pagan roots and not the teaching of the Apostle Paul or any other doctrinal sound Christian church…they were a messed up bunch who Paul corrected often
). Pauls point was telling the believers that even the pagans believe in the resurrection because they were being told it would not happen. -
From Rev 22:6 it is very clear that Jesus has not come back yet. Rev 22 in no way is indicating the rebels being healed by Jesus’ living water that flows out to the LOF… This is manufactured by you because Rev 22:6 these things you read in Revelation “must shortly be done”. Verse 7 Jesus says" Behold I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book". Verse 12 Jesus says “And behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work should be” Again, In verse Rev 22:20 He that testifies of these things saith “Surely I come quickly” These verses indicate that Jesus has not come back yet for the book of Revelation to be fulfilled.
Those 7 verses or so were given to you for evidence of no post- mortem salvation. God bless.
My friend Aaron, Doesn’t persuading other characters often seem like a bear!
On #1, I’m afraid you just repeat that you “believe” Jesus Only preached to the repentant dead, and that it “will never happen again.” But as far as I can see, you still offer no Biblical evidence for such ideas. You do seem to think “different sections” in Luke 16’s parable would support your conception. But I can’t see its’ relevance, nor think that’s Jesus’ story’s point anyway.
-
You assert the church baptized for the dead, but was paganly heretical to do it. Possibly! But Paul is not slow to correct other Corinthian errors, and says not a word about this being pagan or incorrect. Indeed, wouldn’t it be crazy to argue Christians into the resurrection on the basis of a practice of theirs that Paul considered totally pagan and misguided (and not even mention that they should knock it off)?
-
You seem to argue that the invitation to salvation after the LoF is present in the account doesn’t matter because “Jesus hasn’t come back yet.” Nobody says he has! And if the Bible’s accounts of scenes of redemption after the LoF is in place don’t count until the 2nd coming(?) wouldn’t you reject whatever the Bible could say about such a reality?
You say your 7 texts show that there is “no post-mortem salvation.” But I can’t see that they even address that topic, much less explicitly deny that God could do that. When so many texts declare God’s victory is universal, you need a more explicit denial.
Grace be with you,
Bob
Hello Bob
No, I said it was manufactured by you to claim Rev 22:17 supports “Jesus’ living water that flows out to where the LoF is” because Rev 22:6 “these things which must shortly be done” and Rev 22:12 Jesus says “And behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work should be” They haven’t happen yet, it was a vision given to John at the time. You are trying to say that Rev 22:17 is extending post mortem salvation or post mortem reconciliation to people who are in the LOF who haven’t been thrown into the LOF yet. Do you not see this, Bob?
What Aaron doesn’t seem to define is how Lazarus is “IN PRISON”.
If Peter says Jesus preached to those who are now in prison and those in Noah’s time repented and Aaron references us to look at Luke 16 - then I suppose Lazarus is in prison??? Strange point of view indeed.
Luke 16 is a picture of two different holding places for the OT dead before the cross. Only hell remains…(paradise is no longer needed to hold the righteous because people now receive the life of God when they are born again and go straight to heaven when they die). Receiving salvation in the OT was not the same as it is today. Notice the richman could see and have a convo with Abraham who was being held in a different place where the righteous were held (paradise). Jesus came down gave spiritual life to the righteous and then turned his attention to the ones who I believe repented before they drowned and died during the flood(disobedient) in hell. After giving them the spiritual life needed to go to heaven Jesus then led the multiple of captives with him and ascended to heaven Eph 4:8.
Uh you forgot one thing…
You forgot to explain why Lazarus (the repentant) is in paradise
while the repentant disobedient of Noah’s time are in prison.
Please, explain.
Hello Aaron, I know you can’t respond to every difficulty posed for your contentions. But when you ignore all the arguments I present that your interpretations on numerous texts won’t work, and you ONLY ask whether your arguments on the LoF ONE that’s important to you isn’t clear, it could appear that you don’t expect to interact on a level playing field.
But to meet you you where you are, I’m sorry to admit that Rev. was indeed the one text where I felt I didn’t grasp what you were understanding. Don’t be discouraged. I find it’s commonly frustrating to make many things clear to someone with a different vantage point, even though it seems obvious to ourself. Maybe you can detail your logic on this step by step to me, “Becasue I understand vs. 6 to say… I conclude such and such… therefore…”
My impression is that you reason as follows: In the 1st century John has a futuristic vision of God coming in a Holy City, bringing the promise of the water of life (e.g. 2:1-22:5), and a sulfurous LoF (e.g. 14:10f; 20:10; 21:8, etc). If so, I’d agree. But you see that what John is told about Jesus’ coming in 22:6,7,10,12,20 is that this envisioned future is still future (I’d agree). So, when 22:17 portrays the Bride inviting anyone to come to the water of life, you assume that doesn’t apply to 21:1-22:5’s future setting of the LoF, but only to our present situation now on earth.
If that’s what you’re saying, I’ve already said it’s a quite possible way to read it, and that I put no weight on my interpretation. I wouldn’t cite 22:17 at all if I had not offered other indications from Rev. that God later redeems those who were rebellious on earth. For that would require a continuted invitation.
As weaker support, the fact that the Gospel invitation is portrayed with the precise objects described in the future scene with the LoF on the outside of the Holy City (e.g. “thirsty” people and the flow of the “water of life” to the outside of the City) may encourage the hope that this invitation IS especially relevant to that future scene. Also calling believers who invite all the lost here the “Bride” uses the very term that is applied to the church after the yet future heavenly wedding feast and Holy City arrives (19:7; 21:2,9). And if those issuing this invitation are those whose marriage has thus been consumated, might it be that this refers to the ongoing privilege of the glorified church?
Because only 8 were saved during the flood and only Noah was considered “righteous” in God’s eyes. These people died in a unrighteous state but I believe that some of them including Noah’s own family members ( sisters, etc) as the flood waters rose they realized Noah was right and how wrong they were and repented before they drowned. Not everyone that drowned repented but I believe some of them did and the ones that did Jesus preached to the disobedient.
can you back that up with a verse that states it specifically? that’s a bit of a leap surely?
That is correct, Bob. Rev 22:6 is the close of the letter and that anything after that is not meant to be seen chronological, but only to our present situation now on earth. This verse in Rev 22:17 and other verses in Rev 22 are used incorrectly to point to a post mortem salvation call in the LOF.
Again, anything after Rev 22:6 is not meant to be seen chronological, but only to our present situation now on earth. Where the Spirit and the bride says, “come”, I believe the Spirit and the bride are asking the current world to come to drink of the water of life freely.
Do you even find any mention of ECT before the flood… did Noah really understand the situation as you do?
The first mistranlation of the Hebrew word sheol (hell KJV) doesn’t happen until Deut 32:22. Did they really know all the Facts?
They probably didn’t know God created everlasting fire that was prepared for the Devil and his angels either but what did they know? Noah preached that judgment was coming and they better repent and get inside the Ark.
So God will punish people eternally, yet never warned them about it? Thats justice? 80 years of sin (which they were born into, subjected to futility) deserves trillions of trillions of trillions which doesn’t even begin eternity (oh wait eternity means without beginning or end). Thats justice? That sounds like a vindictive little child, kind of like a god created by the carnal minds of men.
Hello, they were warned! Noah told them God was going to flood the earth to wipe them out and they rejected Noah’s 120 years worth of preaching and warning. How you feel about how God performs justice is not going to change what has been established in his word.
Die [size=150]DOES NOT EQUAL ETERNAL PUNISHMENT[/size]
Judgement [size=150]DOES NOT MEAN ETERNAL PUNISHMENT[/size]
For the wages of sin is ______________? a) 50 lashings with a wet noodle b) death c) being tortured for all eternity
But the ____________ is life in Christ Jesus. a) free gift b) white elephant c) thing you have to pay for by being smart enough to choose by accepting