Rose's Reasonings

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

A Question with no Requirement for Yes/No answers (but they are welcome)

Colin Maxwell (goodnightsafehome) and Antonio were having an interesting discussion in the comments of the previous post. (Kev and KC got in on the action too)

It regards eternity. I admit I have never given this particular DARK and DREARY aspect of eternity much study or thought. I find it to be a very heavy contemplation. Colin had brought it up in the past to me, albeit from a different angle, and I fled the consideration back then. I didn't really want to spend too much energy thinking about such a black propostition. I have decided that it is worth a broader discussion. I hope people will get involved.

I am going to frame it this way:

Will sin go on throughout eternity?

What do you think? Do you have any scriptural reasons for your thoughts? If not, that is fine - your "scriptural sense" is OK to voice too - even if you don't have a proof-text.

I confess, I sense the answer is NO, but I have not studied it out. Colin holds that the answer is YES and he is not a dummy, so it seems like a challenging question to me.

64 Comments:

Hi Rose,

If I may expand a little here on my reason for the affirmative:

1) In one place where we have the veil drawn back and a terrible look into the eternity of the lost, we discover one of the damned continually arguing with the will of God: “Nay, Father Abraham…” (Luke 16:30) If this denial of the will of God is not a sin, then what is? If it is a sin, then the question you pose is answered.

2) One of the glories of Heaven, is that no sin will enter there. This would appear also then to be one of the glories of hell if the answer is in the negative.

3) What is there in the soul of the wicked that will prevent it from sinning? Will all its thoughts and emotions be pure and holy? If not, then they will be sinful and again, the question is answered.

I accept there is a certain dreariness about these thoughts. I don’t tend to think on them day and night. But they do crop up again, especially in relation to other matters.

It will be interesting to see what others come up with.

Regards,

By Colin Maxwell, at 1/27/2009 11:48 AM
Hi Rose,
I agree with Colin and I believe Romans 5 verifies this. We all sin because we are sinners due to the fall of Adam. It takes God, through glorification, to correct this and since those in hell will still be sinners, I believe they will still be sinning.
wayne

By jazzycat, at 1/27/2009 1:18 PM
Hi Rose,

I would *love* to see someone soberly argue that all the sinners in hell suddenly start (and forever continue) to love God with all their heart, mind, soul, and strength, and thereby avoid the first and most obvious sin for all eternity.

It seems absurd to me to even discuss the matter.

By Daniel, at 1/27/2009 1:40 PM
Daniel,
well... hmmm... you think it is absurd? Sorry, but I think it is interesting. So there. :~P

There is something that bothers me about this thought. How does God triumph in the end if this goes on throughout eternity? Now before you jump on my case, I believe in hell, and I don't believe in annihilation. There is just something that seems off about this. I can't put my finger on it. Maybe it is the wrong framework for the thought - maybe a category confusion. I don't know.

Now as to your comment:
I don't think that would be the argument that anyone would offer. pfffft (to quote you from days gone by) :~)

You guys may well be right, but why is it absurd to think further about it?

The thought police have left this blog. :~)

By Rose~, at 1/27/2009 1:46 PM
Thank you Colin and Jazzy.

How about one of you conveniently post that passage here - help me out. I am boiling eggs and putting away groceries.

By Rose~, at 1/27/2009 1:47 PM
Go for it, Jazzy.

My wee lad's in the bath and it's prayer meeting night here!

Regards,

By Colin Maxwell, at 1/27/2009 1:53 PM
Hi Rose,

I was also following the other comment thread on this topic. I'm not sure that your question here is the same as what was being discussed in the other thread. So, some random thoughts...

1. To answer this article's question, YES. :-) I don't see how sin could NOT go on for all of eternity. What will people in hell be doing, if not sinning? It is usually taught that "gnashing of teeth" indicates many who are angry with God for their judgment, or are in some way not completely satisifed that "the Judge of all the earth [did] right". If they are not sinning, are they doing good deeds? How then could such a place, where there is no sin, be accurately described as "hell"? I think Colin may have been saying this same type of thing.

2. Rose, to answer your question about how God could be ultimately victorious if sin continues on... my view is that eternal hell is the appropriate judgment for those who have refused God. IOW, what is God to do with those who have rejected him? They obviously cannot live in heaven with him. To annhilate them would be to lower the value of their lives, which God cannot nor desires to do. Judgment must be upon them. Thus, my view is that their judgment will be exactly what they chose. They chose themselves and their sin over God, therefore that is exactly what they are given - it is just punishment. As such, God can "triumph" because justice has been perfectly served in every case. The mere existence of sin does not necessarily equal God's lack of triumph. If perfect justice has been served and perfect judgment meted out to all, then God triumphs.

3. Antonio seems to be saying (although this is new to me, so I'm sure he'll correct me where I'm wrong ;-) ) that since (in his view) God's wrath against people's sins doesn't last forever, and since hell DOES last forever, that therefore hell cannot be God's wrath against sin.

IF this is correct, this seems to be a false dichotomy. Why can't God judge people eternally for their sin w/o being angry at them? Can't a judge pass a sentence on a convicted criminal w/o being mad about it? Must God have "wrath" in order to mete out judgment?

Further, Antonio seems to be opposed to the impassibility of God (interested folks can read up on it here and here). God does not need to "feel" angry (a la Palpatine's face) in order to execute an eternal judgment of wrath. And again, God does not even need "wrath" in order to execute an eternal judgment. Eternal judgment does not necessarily equal eternal wrath.

A final question for Antonio. You said that hell is the "just desserts", the "natural consequence" of the sinner's "behaviors". How is this different from saying that people go to hell "because" of their sins? In your illustration of the high IQ son, the boy failed to do the required work, and therefore did not receive the item he desired. Since the son "received the natural consequence of his sin", it would also be accurate to say that he was without a car "because" of his sin.

P.S. In the interest of being precise, Luke's actual response to Palapatine was: "Never. I'll never turn to the Dark Side. You have failed, your highness. I am a Jedi like my father before me." And Palpatine's response was, "So be it... Jedi." Such sloppiness in quoting isn't tolerated by extreme Star Wars fans such as those I am surrounded by. ;-)

Colin, you've never seen Star Wars??????? That is the most astonishing thing I've read on this blog. ;-)

By Rachel, at 1/27/2009 4:28 PM
Rose,
Although it has been a cold winter in Mississippi, it got up to around 70 today.

The passage that came to me was the following:
Rom. 5:19 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.

Romans 8:30 speaks of glorification for believers, but it would seem that the lost will remain sinners forever.....

By jazzycat, at 1/27/2009 4:39 PM
Rose, I can appreciate your interest. ;^)

In Matthew 1:20-21 we read, "But as [Joseph] considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, 'Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.' " [ESV]

I ask two questions of the text that I think are germane to the discussion: [1] Who does Jesus save? and [2] From what are men delivered?

From the verse, Christ [1] saves His people, [2] from their sin.

If Christ saves His people from their sin, it logically follows that the other group (those who are not "His people"), are not saved from their sin.

Scripture tells us that Christ saves us from [a] God's wrath (Romans 5:9), and [b] from our sin (Matthew 1:21). Examining each in its turn, we ask first, "When are we saved from God's wrath?", and answer that although we are saved right now, the actual wrath part wouldn't have caught up with us until after we died. Likewise if we ask, "When are we saved from sin?" we again answer that we are saved from sin right now, (c.f. Romans 6-8); but qualify it likewise as a salvation from sin that is in Christ, and realized ultimately in eternity.

If then, salvation from sin and from God's wrath (on account of sin) ultimately takes place in eternity, what is being suggested is that in eternity both the redeemed and the "lost" (i.e. everyone and their dog) have been saved (by Christ) from *sin*, but that the redeemed are saved from God's wrath as well.

My understanding of scripture is that you cannot seperate salvation into components that happen seperately from each other - I believe that when you are saved you are saved from both sin and wrath, and that it is impossible to be saved from one in the absence of the other.

Since we answered the question that only Christ's people are saved from sin, it follows that those who are not Christ's people will continue to experience sin - since there is no salvation for them from it.

By Daniel, at 1/27/2009 5:27 PM
Good question, and I've go with the Yes too.

By Jonathan, at 1/27/2009 5:54 PM
Rachel,

I go somewhat far to answer some of your questions in th other thread.

your free grace theology brother,

Antonio

By Antonio, at 1/27/2009 6:08 PM
That is a really great question Rose.

I think I agree with most that the existence of hell seems to indicate the continuance of sin.

It does boggle the mind though.. seems that sin is something that I equate with the flesh..

I'll stayed tuned..

By kc bob, at 1/27/2009 6:27 PM
Does everyone live forever? Yes! Does everyone live forever? No!
Terms must be clarified, in John’s Gospel eternal life is contrasted to perishing John 3:16. And everyone was under the judgement of death until they believe. So they are receiving something they did not previously have . . . life! John 3:18,36a (He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life)
When God told Adam in Gen 2:17 if he ate of the tree of good and evil he would surly die. In the Hebrew it should read “dying you will die.” At the moment Adam ate of the fruit he began to die, but it wasn’t until 930 yrs later that he physically died. But he came into a state of death the moment he ate. And it’s not until a person believes that they pass from death to life.
The Rich man in “Hades” was like in the county jail waiting for the judgement, he could see and talk to Abraham. But at the Great White Throne he will give an account and all the books will be opened and it will be shown that his righteousness was as filthy rags, but he will be given a fair hearing. But notice sin, as sin is not mentioned there . . . .Why? Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world!!!! Works are mentioned there and of course all his works are sinful, but sin, as sin is not mentioned. Then the book of life is opened, and he is cast into the lake of fire because his name is not found there. He did not have…LIFE! His fundamental problem was NOT sin because Jesus had paid for that (John 1:29; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 John 2:2). His fundamental problem is he did not have life! And it’s here at the Great White Throne that we see that “Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire” Rev 20:13 This is the SECOND DEATH!!! They were already dead because they did not have life, but the second death they are eternally separated from God. They exist, but they are continually perishing and perishing and perishing. They never get to the place of extinction but perish forever. They will have continuing existence but they do not have life, therefore they will not be sinning but decaying continuously forever!!!!

Alvin :( unless you have life :-)

By alvin, at 1/28/2009 12:15 AM
Another excellent question for discussion Rose.

I admit I don’t know the answer but I must also admit I don’t find the arguments here very compelling either way. Those who answer yes seem to presuppose sin as privation of the good while those (him?) who say no must presuppose sin as privation of justice. In the case of the former there is no wiggle room. The answer must logically be yes. In the case of the latter a biblical argument can easily be made for the negative. I am not convinced or prone toward either philosophy.

By Kc, at 1/28/2009 3:23 AM
Sis, one more thought…

To follow up on KB’s comment, if you could prove that the lust of the flesh is the only lust prone to men *and* given the knowledge that we sin when we are drawn away by our own lust *then* sin would be impossible after death. ;-)

By Kc, at 1/28/2009 3:55 AM
Good morning Rose/all

Kc:- Unless the damned soul goes into some kind of vegetative state, then it must continue to be capable of rational thoughts etc., Are these thoughts and feelings etc., sin free? The answer to this ultimately answers the question.

Rachel: I gave up my fascination with Sci-fi when I was about 7 years old. I don’t know if the British production “Dr Who” ever made it’s way across the Atlantic, but that was about the height of my experience. (Matthew would know who I’m talking about) Even Star Trek with its famous “Beam me up, Scotty” failed to grab me. I liked Kojak though and other more terrestrial based heroes.

Regards,

By Colin Maxwell, at 1/28/2009 4:04 AM
Sorry, I missed Kc's follow up comment. Surely lust is a matter of the mind? A man does not need even to touch a woman to commit adultery with her. All he has to do is to form certain thoughts in his mind and the deed is as good as done (Matthew 5:28) Likewise with greed, anger, hatred, covetousness etc., They all commence in the mind and then work themselves out in the flesh when and if they can - but the sin has registered long before the body can give vent to it.

The same again with virtue. I might want to help someone in need if I could but be unable to do so. But the fact that I felt pity etc., is a virtue, even if unable to give vent to it in a practical way.

Regards,

By Colin Maxwell, at 1/28/2009 5:57 AM
Hi Rose
Look what I did, I forgot to greet you...how stupid of me!!! Bad boy!!!
Greetings in the name of the Lord!

Daniel 9:
24 “ Seventy weeksare determined
For your people and for your holy city,
To finish the transgression,
To make an end of sins,
To make reconciliation for iniquity,
To bring in everlasting righteousness,
To seal up vision and prophecy,
And to anoint the Most Holy.

alvin :)

By alvin, at 1/28/2009 7:22 AM
Hi Rose

That's where we get messed up if we don't take child like verses for what they say:
John 3:16
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but has eternal life.

John 1:29
The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!
(emphasis mine)
alvin :)

By alvin, at 1/28/2009 7:48 AM
Hello Rose,
Alvin's Daniel 9:24 passage refers to Christ and the crucifixion, which pays the sin debt of the elect and establishes the basis for the righteousness of all who place their faith in him.

It obviously did not end sin.

By jazzycat, at 1/28/2009 9:39 AM
Hi Sis, Colin.

Colin you may well be right but my own understanding on the nature of sin leaves me completely inadequate to judge the matter in any way. I have to rely solely on God (The Word and The Spirit) even to know my own sin and far too often I fail to discern it.

By Kc, at 1/28/2009 9:43 AM
KC:- Fair enough, although it must be said that we are trying to draw our conclusions here by the same means i.e. the Word and the Spirit.

Ultimately and in practical terms, the debate does not affect me. 100 years from now (unless I live to be 147, but there is no immediate family history) I will be in a place where we will sin-no-more. A very pleasant thought indeed.

I agree with 100% entirely, Jazzycat, although I think I can see the road this debate might take. I hope not.

Regards,

By Colin Maxwell, at 1/28/2009 9:57 AM
Antonio,

I read your comments in the other thread, but was unable to find the answers you believed you provided. Could you please answer my questions specifically in this thread so it is more clear to me?

By Rachel, at 1/28/2009 10:11 AM
I wanted to clarify about the question, especially for Rachel, since she didn't think I accurately represented Colin's issue.

Colin brought up the idea of the lost continually sinning, on into eternity, a while back, when we were talking about whether or not Christ died for ALL SIN. His newer discussion about God's wrath going on for all eternity is very closely related to it. I framed the question in my own way, focusing more on that which is the object of God's wrath - sin.

By Rose~, at 1/28/2009 10:19 AM
TAHNK YOU all of you for coming here and getting into this. You know I appreciate your comments even though I am not mentioning all of your names. Thanks a bunch.

I am reading everything and am so glad for the differing points of view.

By Rose~, at 1/28/2009 10:39 AM
Colin you said this in the other comments of the previous post:

In effect what I am saying is that those who are in hell cannot exercise saving faith. This being so, they are still (obviously) unbelievers and therefore still abiding under the wrath of God as threatened in John 3:36. I therefore draw the only conclusion that is possible i.e. that God’s wrath is displayed in hell and therefore is eternal.

I am thinking about characterizing those in hell as "still unbelievers" and am wondering if that is the right way to even think of them. They are confirmed in their state, just as we will be confirmed in our state and will "know even as we are known." I think the "unebliever" aspect is done. There are no matters of belief and unbelief anymore.

These have passed from one state to another. Will they still have a will? They will have no flesh, as Bob pointed out. What will their minds be like? Is it right to think of their minds and thoughts as those of the human beings that we see all around us today?

When I read how Antonio described them it embodied better the picture I have of those in hell than the idea of "sinning continually" does:

They receive the natural consequence for their sin ... which is eternal corruption

Eternal corruption.

Is this sin? Do they have a will anymore to sin? Do they act or will in any way... or are they just as Alvin described them:

They exist, but they are continually perishing and perishing and perishing. They never get to the place of extinction but perish forever. They will have continuing existence but they do not have life... decaying continuously forever...

Alvin imagines it as I do.

It is a whole new ballgame in hell, is it not? Are there any freedoms afforded these dacaying corpses? Any original thought? Any will that sets itself against it's creator... or just an eternity of decay, blackness and emptiness?

I think of it more like the latter. I think that is why this was bothering me and not as self-evident as the first few commentors were seeing it.

I think the Bible leaves a little room for us to wonder here.

By Rose~, at 1/28/2009 10:49 AM
Rose, how does scripture speak to you on the thought that some sinners will be punished more severely in hell than others? There are several verses that imply this, and a few that (more or less) state it. If this is so, how does that harmonize with the notion that we are eternally perishing? Will Capernaum eternally perish in a worse way that Sodom? (I am of course trying to follow these ideas to their final conclusions)

By Daniel, at 1/28/2009 11:01 AM
My first question, brought on by the text that you are referring to is to ask whether the
"Day of Judgement" = Eternity

What do you think? I think of the "Day of Judgement" as the actual Judgement process where God sits in Judgement and everyhting is laid open and bare and all is evaluated for all to see. I don't think of "the Day of Judgement" as an eternal experience. The consequences of it are eternal: no place found for them.

What are your thoughts?

By Rose~, at 1/28/2009 11:28 AM
Rose:

Re: the wicked in hell. Do you think, Rose, that they are beyond thoughts or feeling? Are they in a kind of vegetative state? Are they still rational? Wherein lies the torment and the remembering that we read of in Luke 16? Do they (as Daniel asked above) love the Lord their God with all their heart and soul and mind? Are they required to? Does God require this of His creatures or are they excused from it? If required, can they deliver? If they don’t, then surely this is sin?

Regards,

By Colin Maxwell, at 1/28/2009 11:28 AM
Part of the difficulty for me in this whole discussion is the idea that we are talking about what 'life' will be like in a timeless existence.. a concept that is so difficult to get my head around..

By kc bob, at 1/28/2009 11:38 AM
That is a good question. I don't know.

The picture we get from Luke 16 of Hades certainly involves thought and torment, you are right.

Was this place where the rich man dwelt the same as the eternal place that people will go after the final Judgement?

By Rose~, at 1/28/2009 11:38 AM
Me too, Bob!! Thanks for commiserating. :~)

By Rose~, at 1/28/2009 11:39 AM
Rose, I find I can't quite grip the notion that the notion of greater/lesser applies only to one's comfort level on judgment day, which is all that is left if we divest judgment day from the actual judgment that is meted out on that day.

Do you mean that on judgment day God will mete out a perfectly uniform and equal punishment to all unrepentant sinners, regardless of the severity of their sin, but will do so with verying degrees of excitement/wrath/hoopla?

I am trying to understand what you mean by examining judgment day apart from the judgment that happens on that day, that is, I too can look at this one text (there are others), and see that it says this is going to happen on the "day of judgment" - but I find myself at a loss to imagine how judgment day will be worse unless the judgment itself is worse, if you take my meaning.

I don't believe I am missing anything, but I don't want to be dense either, so I am happy to take instruction in the matter.

By Daniel, at 1/28/2009 11:44 AM
the notion that the notion...

Sometimes I have to laugh at my own typing.

By Daniel, at 1/28/2009 11:46 AM
I have to think about it, Daniel.
I hope if anyone has any scriptures or ideas to offer to shed some light on this that they will.

By Rose~, at 1/28/2009 11:48 AM
I just can't imagine that God is going to allow sin to go on and on and on for all eternity.

By Rose~, at 1/28/2009 11:49 AM
Rose:

I just can't imagine that God is going to allow sin to go on and on and on for all eternity.

One of the arguments of the Universalist (not that I am accusing you of such) is that God could not be happy if there was one lost soul left in hell and that it would be a blot on His eternal horizon. Yet we know that this will be the case with eternal fire and torment etc., It would certainly be very fitting (law of the harvest) for sin to be allowed to continue, but banished to hell where those who wanted it on earth and lived for it can have it, although in all its bitterness and death as opposed to its pleasures.

We know that lost souls will still be in existence with full rational powers, capable of remorse and regret etc., Unless God relieves them of the responsibility of loving Him with all their souls and hearts etc., (which would seem so strange, seeing that He requires it of them now and such is His by right as God) then they will fail to deliver. How can that not be viewed as a sin.

To my mind, the only answer lies either in accepting what I (and others) have been arguing for here, or ultimately end up in the Universalist camp. Is it any easier to imagine that God is going to allow tormented souls to live for all eternity, years without end, crying out in the smoke of their torment, desiring a cup of cold water for their tongues etc.,? When this is denied them (as not being the will of God) then is it a sin to ask for it again?

Regards,

By Colin Maxwell, at 1/28/2009 12:16 PM
Hi Rose,

Your question is, "Will sin go on throughout eternity?"

Consider Mark 3:29, "but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin"

Does that sin ever cease? Would then the guilt ever cease?

Now, I'm not inclined to agree with Antonio who (correct me if I'm wrong) has said that God's wrath ceases in regard to that sin. However, I ran across this passage.

Revelation 15:1
"Then I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvelous, seven angels who had seven plagues, which are the last, because in them the wrath of God is finished."

I'm not sure if this means that all of God's wrath is finished or if that means it's finished for that particular purpose.

I think we'd have to define sin, wouldn't we, in order to answer the question you've poised. Sin is lawlessness, is it not. Does God's law still apply to those who are in hell? Or are they free from the law? Are they free from doing what God commands?

But I do think that either way, whether sin continues or not, the punishment is eternal. The guilt for that sin remains. Those who are not in Christ will be held accountable and condemned.

In Christ,
Ten Cent

By Ten Cent, at 1/28/2009 12:26 PM
Hi, Rose. This sort of lively and thought-provoking discussion is refreshing, isn't it? :)

So, there's everlasting life... and everlasting death... nothing finite but flesh...?

I'm really regretting that my introduction to the Word was through an atheist - where I concluded that God created life eternal and that all else burns away ("all else" would be "death"). This is how I got around the election issue, too. Silly me. With no Christian training, I would have answered "No."

It seems to me that the existance of sin for eternity defies God's glory - and that sin would also have no beginning nor end. But I guess that would explain why sin needed an eternal sacrifice.

Just thinking out loud... carry on!

By Missy, at 1/28/2009 4:06 PM
Certainly some interesting views here about the state of the eternally damned. Where do we get the idea that those in hell won't have "flesh"? I think it's fairly clear those of us in heaven will have some sort of physical body ("flesh"), so why not those in hell?

And the picture being painted by some here, I find unusual. I agree with Colin here. The idea that those in hell exist in some sort of state of "decay" ("decaying corpses" is definitely a new view to me), whereby they have no "original thought" or will/freedom, is difficult to reconcile with Scriptural depictions that include torment, pain, misery, levels of punishment, etc.

These descriptions ("eternal decay", "blackness", etc.) don't seem to me to be much different than annhilation practically-speaking. If one has a consciousness, surely one is capable of thought and/or will. But if one isn't capable of thought or will, how can one be said to have a consciousness? And then, wherein is the misery?

By Rachel, at 1/28/2009 4:09 PM
By the way, has anyone here read The Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis? I would recommend it.

By Rachel, at 1/28/2009 4:14 PM
Rachel,
You said:
Where do we get the idea that those in hell won't have "flesh"? I think it's fairly clear those of us in heaven will have some sort of physical body ("flesh"), so why not those in hell?

You're absolutely right. All the dead will be raised. In what sense will they be raised if not physical?

I knew that but I just wasn't thinking.

Thanks

By Rose~, at 1/28/2009 4:19 PM
Hi Sis. I understand the scripture to show that flesh is corrupt:

Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
(1 Corinthians 15:50 KJV)

By Kc, at 1/28/2009 4:34 PM
Hi KC,
But they do get a BODY of some sort - we might not call it flesh, but it is a body, right? - for they are "raised" for judgement. We get a "spiritual body" - is their's of the same type?

By Rose~, at 1/28/2009 4:39 PM
Sis I could only speculate.

By Kc, at 1/28/2009 4:55 PM
Good morning Rose,

I was talking to a Christian friend of mine today and mentioned this debate. He pointd out that the angels sinned without the benefits of a human body. I thought this to be a good point.

Regards,

By Colin Maxwell, at 1/29/2009 7:39 AM
Hi Rose

Psalm 73
When I thought how to understand this,

It was too painful for me—

Until I went into the sanctuary of

God;

Then I understood their end.

Surely You set them in slippery

Places;

You cast them down to

Destruction.

Oh, how they are brought to

Desolation, as in a moment!

They are utterly consumed with

terrors.

The natural law of sowing and reaping goes on and on, reaping eternal corruption.

No wonder there aren’t any elephants in this room.
There’s a mouse--> <:--~

good~night

By alvin, at 1/29/2009 10:15 AM
Missy,
Thanks for thinking out loud. I appreciate you sharing those thoughts... so much.

By Rose~, at 1/29/2009 1:25 PM
Good point, Colin.

I think I have gotten into the pattern (wrong or not) of thinking of all sin as stemming from "the flesh". You know - even a sinful thought - whether it be selfishness or rebellion against God - it is all from the "flesh" - this could be a good study to figure out if this is scriptural or not. I am thinking of a few verses that seem to indicate that it is, but I am certain I am missing some as well. :~)

By Rose~, at 1/29/2009 1:31 PM
Daniel, Colin, anyone else:

Does anyone want to offer any thoughts on

1. what is it that the doomed dead are raised to? Is this a "spiritual body" - any ideas how to think of this?

2. is the place where "the Rich man" of Luke 16 is - Hades - is that the same as the everlasting place that the doomed will go after the final Judgement?

I am sure I have learned something about this in the past, but have not thought about it for so long, I have forgotten.

By Rose~, at 1/29/2009 1:36 PM
Hi Rose,

1) There is a resurrection both of the just and the unjust and this must (“mustn’t it?” as they would query over here) be a body of some sort in that the soul never ceases to be and therefore is not resurrection.

Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. (John 5:28-29)

2) I tend to believe that the Rich Man went to Hell – the same hell – where the wicked dead will be after the final Judgement. I am not a big fan of the “Divided Hades” view. (Please…no one start bombarding me with the 1,001 questions that can follow!)

Regards,

By Colin Maxwell, at 1/29/2009 1:58 PM
Hi Rose

This is my take on it.
They are resurrected for when they stand before God to give an account. Which we know how it will turn out but they will be given a fair hearing, those who did good will get eternal life but we know none of them did good.
While they were in hades they were able to see Abraham and converse with him. Also Jesus visted them there proclaiming His victory but in the final state they are fitted with bodies for destruction Rom 9:22. There they will be totally consumed with terrors and will have known the truth but know they missed God's love! Beyond that they really have nothing to do with anything but are eternally rotting away.
So we need to get out there and make sure people know the love of God for each and every one of them!

alvin :) off to work

By alvin, at 1/29/2009 6:33 PM
Hi Rose

I'm going to come at this from a little different angle, the digging and thinking on this has done me good.
The Rich man in Luke 16
24 “Then he cried and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.’ 25 But Abraham said, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted and you are tormented. 26 And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.’
27 “Then he said, ‘I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father’s house, 28 for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’ 29 Abraham said to him, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’ 30 And he said, ‘No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ 31 But he said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.’”

Colin sees this man as rebelling against God here. I see this man as one who has seen what he has missed and is desperate. He has believed the gospel is true and wants his family to be saved. He has had a change of heart but it is to late he knows for him, but he does not want his family to come there so he's pleading. He says "have mercy on me" "I beg you" "No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead they will repent" the Rich man is not wanting to give up on his family so he is pleading, he is desperate!
I'm wanting to show here that this Rich man now believes the truth but it's to late for him because it is appointed unto man once to die then the judgment. Satan and his demons believe the gospel. They new Jesus was the Messiah and Satan snatches away the seed lest they be saved. But Jesus didn't die for Satan and his demons, and it's to late for anyone who has died because you have to be alive to believe as Jesus said to Martha in John 11: 26 And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?” You have to be a living human being to be able to be saved, but I believe everyone in hell will believe the gospel and know they have missed the love of God forever! Now when they come before Jesus at the Great White Throne of Judgment we have other Scripture that makes clear that "Rom 4:11For it is written: “ As I live, says the LORD,Every knee shall bow to Me,And every tongue shall confess to God.”" that is submission. They will submit to His authority! I honestly do not believe that they will be sinning in hell but will be utterly consumed in terrors! But this is speculation and we know the second death will be eternal separation from God, other words it will be of no real consequence. The only reason I would see a person trying to make a point here would be to try to prove Jesus didn't die for all sin, because people will still be sinning in hell. And then they would say He didn't die for that sin. But when Daniel talks about the seventy weeks, he tells us there is made a end of sins, and I believe those ones in hell will know all their sins were paid for and all they needed to do was believe Jesus promise of life . . .but it's forever to late!

By alvin, at 1/30/2009 10:29 AM
Rose,

What is it that the doomed dead are raised to? Is this a "spiritual body" - any ideas how to think of this?

The doomed dead will be raised, and on judgment day condemned, after which they will be cast into the lake of fire, and cast thus in whatever body they find themselves in.

Note however that "death" will also be cast into the same lake of fire. Whatever body death has, I expect the doomed dead will have one just like it.

I know my answer lacks substance (pun). Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Is the place where "the Rich man" of Luke 16 is - Hades - is that the same as the everlasting place that the doomed will go after the final Judgement?

Hades, will likewise be tossed into the lake of fire, along side (as opposed to "populated by") the doomed dead. That is what the scriptures say, if we don't tweak more meaning into them than is there. If that is the correct way to understand the text, then it stands to reason that Hades is not the lake of fire.

From what I read in scripture, after judgment day, God will create a new heaven and a new earth, and we will live on the new earth (as opposed to getting mansions in heaven). Given that presumption, when we die, we do not immediately go to the as-yet-uncreated "new earth", nor do we go to heaven, but believers go to Abraham's bosom, a place God has prepared for them, which is not heaven, but is by no means a place of torment either. The unredeemed do not go to Abraham's bosom, but instead go to a place of torment, and both groups wait there for judgment day.

On judgment day we are all raised, judged, and sent off to our final destinations - the doomed to the lake of fire, and the redeemed to the new earth that God creates for that purpose.

I am not settled in my opinions on this matter however, and may never be. There is just so much room to go astray, especially if I an decided in various things that could presume themselves into the scant few texts that discuss the matter.

It makes for interesting fare, and is a good exercise in that it causes us to examine why we believe what we do - but ultimately, at the end of the day, for me at least, it remains just that - an exercise. ;)

By Daniel, at 1/30/2009 2:14 PM
I should have mentioned in my last comment, that if Hades is a physical place, then it seems the best way to describe it would be to say that there are two physically separated areas, Abraham's bosom, and the place of torment. But like Colin, I have a hard time with that... clunky.... image.

By Daniel, at 1/30/2009 2:23 PM
to be absent from the body, is to be present with the LORD!

Father into thy hands I commit my spirit . . .

Jesus, "Set the captives free"

Paul visited the "third heaven" . . . "paradise" --- e.g. not Abraham's bosom.

Protestant "Evangelical" Reformed Christians don't believe in "Tollhouses" the Greek Orthodox equivalent to what Daniel is speaking of.

I quoted some of Paul above, for him to say that he would "be with the Lord" WHEN he died . . . is to say that he would be in his very presence (prosopon) --- and Abraham's bosom was as "provisional" as the "Law" was. Once Christ (faith) came, the Old cov. was done away with . . . and the "New" came --- based on better promises. What I'm getting at, is that Abraham's bosom, apparently was done away with at Christ's resurrection.

Now if someone is an Classic Dispy, they you all believe that most certainly Abraham's bosom is still around, and that the "Old Testament" saints are still being "held" there until the "rapture" happens. Maybe Daniel's view is a hybrid of the "Classic Dispy" view . . . I don't really know.

By Anonymous, at 1/30/2009 4:15 PM
Hi Rose

Sense we are speculating a bit!

I believe to be absent from the body was ALWAYS to be present with the Lord!

Food for thought:

The Rich man lifted up his eyes to see Abraham’s bosom.

Jesus said that God is the God of the living and not the dead.

On the mount of Transfiguration Moses and Elijah appeared.

Satan himself isn’t cast out of heaven until mid-way of the Tribulation.

Jesus said to the thief “today you will be with Me in Paradise.”

The ones who were resurrected after Jesus resurrection proved that death could not keep captive the bodies of the saints.

Your just going to have to straighten me out Ha!Ha!

Alvin :)

By alvin, at 1/30/2009 8:19 PM
Hi Rose

I wanted to make clear that I did not believe that people who will be in hell are forgiven. Forgiveness is personal. Just as a judge does not forgive but either finds one guilty or innocent. Jesus made propitiation (satisfied God’s justice) for ALL sin on the cross, that sin cannot be paid for again. But Jesus is only the mercy seat for believers that is where God and man meet in the person of Jesus Christ and are reconciled.
Just as Daniel has stated in the book of Daniel Jesus has made an end to sins and John agrees by saying that Jesus is God's Lamb who took away the sin of the WORLD!

And that is good news for ALL people, Jesus has made a way to be reconciled TO God!

Alvin :)

By alvin, at 1/30/2009 10:01 PM
Hi Rose

The Fifth Kingdom of Daniel

Then the Kingdom and domininion,
And the greatness of the
Kingdoms under the whole
heaven,
Shall be given to the people, the saints of the Most High.
His Kingdom is an everlasting
Kingdom,
And all dominions shall serve and obey Him.
Daniel 7:27

But to which of the angels has He
said;

"Sit at My right hand,
Till I make Your enemies Your
footstool"? Hebrews 1:13

Ask of Me and I will give You
The nations for Your inheritance,
And the ends of the earth for Your possession.
You shall break them with a rod of iron;
You shall dash them to pieces like a potter's vessel. Psalms 2:8,9

"Be silent, all flesh, before the Lord, for He is aroused from His holy habitation! Zech 2:13

To think that people in hell will be rebelling for all eternity is a mistake, they will be silenced forever! I don’t believe that they will go on sinning in hell but will be utterly consumed with terrors!

Alvin :)

By alvin, at 1/31/2009 5:21 AM
Alvin said.................

Just as Daniel has stated in the book of Daniel Jesus has made an end to sins and John agrees by saying that Jesus is God's Lamb who took away the sin of the WORLD!

The last time I looked sin is still proceeding full steam ahead. Earlier in the thread I pointed out Alvin's error in the Daniel passage, which refers to Christ's atonement for sin for the redeemed and not ending sin at some future date. This passage has been fulfilled and sin is still happening..............

By jazzycat, at 1/31/2009 9:19 AM
Hi Jazzycat

What you don’t understand is I’m covering both sides. The question is: Will sin go on throughout eternity?

I’m showing that all sin has been dealt with at the cross judicially. God’s justice has been satisfied concerning sin, and that is why He can offer the living water freely for anyone to take. So whether they are sinning in hell or not is irrelevant. But, I believe I’ve made a strong case that they won’t be sinning throughout eternity, but will be brought into submission to God’s authority. He will make His enemies His footstool, and they will bow and confess He is God. And I believe their final state the SECOND DEATH is worse then the FIRST! They will be forever separated from all that’s good which is God, and will be utterly consumed with terrors.

I'm not saying that the fruit of death has ended, because as long as we are in these bodies "we all fall short of the glory of God" and that includes believers too!

1Cor 15:24-28 Then comes the end, when He delivers the Kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power.
For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet.
That last enemy that will be destroyed is death.
"For He has put ALL things under His feet."
But when He says "all things are put under Him,' it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted.
Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.

To think that man will go on rebelling for all eternity would mean that they were not made subject to Him.

Death is mans fundamental problem and that's why John's Gospel deals with that issue by offering the gift of life.

Alvin :)

By alvin, at 1/31/2009 11:06 PM
Happy New year Rose!

Interesting question I had not considered before... I have some thoughts that I am going to consider and maybe even make a blog for that a few friends and I have been arguing about for years. It would hijack this to even start it.

By Trent, at 2/01/2009 1:39 PM
Bobby wrote:
----------
Now if someone is an Classic Dispy, they you all believe that most certainly Abraham's bosom is still around, and that the "Old Testament" saints are still being "held" there until the "rapture" happens.
----------

I don't know where you get this information at. There may be some classic dispensationalist that believes this, but this is not what I believe or what I have read many other classic dispensationalists to believe.

Please be careful to not paint classic dispensationalism with such broad strokes.

Your free grace brother,

Antonio

By Antonio, at 2/01/2009 4:19 PM
Hi Trent!! Good to see you - will check it out.

Bobby,
Would you mind telling us which CD theologians you were thinking about? If I remember right, Scofield held that view. Who else?

By Rose~, at 2/02/2009 6:18 PM

Metaschema - Erlenmeyer Flask Hungry/6 - Jodie The Stumbling Block - Bobby Sanc's Blog - Michele

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

A Question with no Requirement for Yes/No answers (but they are welcome)

64 Comments:

Metaschema - Erlenmeyer Flask

Hungry/6 - Jodie

The Stumbling Block - Bobby

Sanc's Blog - Michele