If you cannot love an eternal torment god

[Someday]

Jon,

I think cause and effect is a Truth that has been taught universally for a very long time. Hinduism and Buddhism speak of Karma. It's central to the universe. Cause and effect is the core of everything. Jews also made extensive use of cause and effect through administration of the Law and the teachings of reaping what you sow. These are definitely Truths. I don't think anyone can effectively deny this.

Grace, on the other hand, is believing that God is not part of this cause and effect cycle. Grace is God extending His love to the most wretched and vile (by human standards) people. Grace is really what you are talking about when you say "God does not punish anyone for sin is because their never was Sin to begin with, or seperation and God has no Need"
Jesus atonement was set forth to end the cycle of cause and effect, something man lived by in this world since the beginning. Adam lived through Grace originally. Then he fell........from Grace. Not because God rejected him, Adam chose to live by Karma, to experience the knowledge of good and evil, to be refined in the fires of trial.
Grace has always been there, and ever will be. Christ is a reminder, and His atonement fulfilled any requirement man thought they had towards God. Christ is the tree of life and the shepherd who shall bring His flock home again, to show us the way back to accepting Grace as it was in the beginning.

Blessings

Blessings

[JM]

To take from your first post above Roger..

" Jesus died on the cross and rose from the dead to guarantee that any necessary "kolasis aionian" (age-during corrective chastisement) will be 100% effective in changing wrong attitudes. All acts of sin have been forgiven for everyone. Attitudes cannot be forgiven. Attitudes must change. This is what the lake of fire which is the second death will do. It will last no longer than God sees is good for everyone involved. Google up "

Oh so God can forgive Acts of Sin but Actions and Attitudes are Seperate. God cant forgive that.. OH no.. lol... the action was not done out of an Attitude.. Please.... this just gets more and more absurd by the minute!!..

Jesus now came to pay for acts done, and Jesus clears up attitudes by laying out laws that people must follow ( REQUIREMENTS) and if they are not followed..

A quick DUNK in the Lake of Fire will sort out the Attitudes.. Just like dunking a piece of dirty Copper into a Cleaner... and out they come Never to have the same attitudes again because their FREE will is no longer in effect lol..

Please... ACTIONS AND ATTITUDES... now we really are Splitting Hairs for the sake of WHICH RELIGIOUS INTERPRETATION of a book is right..

[JM]

Originally Posted by Someday

Jon,

I think cause and effect is a Truth that has been taught universally for a very long time. Hinduism and Buddhism speak of Karma. It's central to the universe. Cause and effect is the core of everything. Jews also made extensive use of cause and effect through administration of the Law and the teachings of reaping what you sow. These are definitely Truths. I don't think anyone can effectively deny this.

Grace, on the other hand, is believing that God is not part of this cause and effect cycle. Grace is God extending His love to the most wretched and vile (by human standards) people. Grace is really what you are talking about when you say "God does not punish anyone for sin is because their never was Sin to begin with, or seperation and God has no Need"
Jesus atonement was set forth to end the cycle of cause and effect, something man lived by in this world since the beginning. Adam lived through Grace originally. Then he fell........from Grace. Not because God rejected him, Adam chose to live by Karma, to experience the knowledge of good and evil, to be refined in the fires of trial.
Grace has always been there, and ever will be. Christ is a reminder, and His atonement fulfilled any requirement man thought they had towards God. Christ is the tree of life and the shepherd who shall bring His flock home again, to show us the way back to accepting Grace as it was in the beginning.

Blessings

Blessings

No grace is not what im talking about here. Your still thinking in terms of Christian teaching on.. God extending Grace but given the right circumstances God will not extend Grace because God must be kept appeased.

Christians think the Cross was an atonement and thats fine.. they will continue to experience in this life that reality

But that is only one view of the death of Jesus, it plays into the story of Sinful man, Man Seperated from God and so on and so on on...

The Seed that has been planted makes sense when your looking at the seed packets text

But it plays into the assumption that this was the Original seeds given by God and obviously its going to show God as sorting out his own problem of seperating man because God was unable to forgive them their and then. It plays into the God of need which is the illusion upon all the other ones are based.

So if a person was looking for an explanation of what Christianity teaches.. someday you have given it, but if a person is searching for what is Truth.. they will need to dig a little deeper beyond the stories

[Someday]

No grace is not what im talking about here. Your still thinking in terms of Christian teaching on.. God extending Grace but given the right circumstances God will not extend Grace because God must be kept appeased.

No Jon. You are interpreting Grace as a fundamentalist Christian does. I didn't say anything about God being kept appeased. I am not a fundamentalist. The principle of Grace is that God is not hung up on our weaknesses, we are. God requires nothing, we only believe He does.
I have to refer you back to the Garden Parable again. God did not ever care that Adam and Eve were naked, yet they hid in shame. They imagined their own sin. They lived in the Grace of God, yet they put blinders on and artificially hid themselves fruitlessly from God. The illusion of separation is our doing, the illusion of sinning against God is our construct.

Why won't you let me agree with you Jon? Is it because I refer to ancient stories that have illustrated these things already? Is it because you dislike my terminology? Is it because you reject everything you think links you to your past beliefs about the Bible?
Is it bothersome that in the last 20 years of studying the Bible, my conclusions of what the Bible is ultimately saying somewhat coincide with what you began to believe AFTER you rejected the Bible? I don't get it.

I think you misinterpret what I said maybe? I never said God needed atonement. God has always forgiven us. It is we who need to forgive ourselves. Christ crucified give US the ability to forgive ourselves without this endless cycle of atonement and sacrifice.

Blessings

[rodgertutt]

Originally Posted by JM

I like this part in your article of assumed truth lol

" I believe every word that the Bible says about the lake of fire; I don't believe what Rome says about it, nor what the apostate Churches say about it, nor what tradition says about it; but I certainly believe what the Bible says about it." link

Duh!.. they are all drawing from the same bible.. His argument is over a matter of interpretation and this has been the pinnacle argument that has always gone on.. it is what has caused one person to say to another.. " you are not a christian " .. " You are not saved ", " You are not accepted ". " You are Seperated from God " , " You dont hear God "

and on and on and on and on....

MEANWHILE.. back at the ranch of sanity

Others have moved beyond the correct interpretation and looked at the very text and those who delievered it..

As there is no point disputing interpretation if you dont have text or people which is/are 100% truthful at least about God

This then becomes a new argument but one which is easily understood without the need for extensive research

If today people can skew what they THINK God has said to them, and people today scrutinize any view about God, then the same scrutinity and ability to skew things about what a person THOUGHT God said to them is to be applied to people of old .

The all-important key issue is this:

“FOREVER AND EVER”

Greek: tormented "for the ages of the ages" a limited period of time referring to the last two ages before God consummates His plan for the ages of time to become All in all. 1Cor. 15:28

All of these combinations are used in the Bible: aion (singular), aions (plural), aion of the aion (singular/singular), aion of the aions (singular/plural), aions of the aions (plural/plural), and aionian (the adjective). ALL of them refer to a limited period of time.

For aionion, or any combination thereof, to mean "eternal" its noun form MUST mean eternal.

It doesn't.

Therefore there is no good argument against God saving all. See

http://www.tentmaker.org/books/Aion_lim.shtml

"THE EONS OF THE EONS" (plural/plural) COMPARED WITH "THE HOLIES OF THE HOLIES" (plural/plural)

There are several analogous expressions in the Scriptures which should show the meaning of the words under discussion. In Ex. 26:33, tou hagiou ton hagion, "in the holy of the holies." This is similar to the "eon of the eons" of Eph. 3:21. In II Kings 8:6 (LXX) we see, eis ta hagia ton hagion, "for the holies of the holies"-similar to "eons of the eons." The "holy of the holies" and "holies of the holies" refer to the tabernacle. Psalm 44:7 says, ho thronos sou ho theos, eis ton aiona tou aionos, "Thy throne, O God, is for the eon of eon"-similar to Heb. 1:8. Daniel 7:18: "until eon of the eons" and similar to that of Eph. 3:21, where a singular is followed by a plural, "eon of the eons." In these expressions we see the eons corresponding to the holies in the tabernacle.

While there are many different teachings on the types in the Tabernacle of Moses, it should not be too difficult to see that there were at least five divisions: (1) without the camp; (2) in the camp; (3) in the court; (4) in the holy place; and (5) in the holy of holies. These may be likened to the five eons we find in the Scriptures (past eons, present eon, future eons). The last eon is called the "eon of the eons," because it, like the "holy of holies," is the climax of the others. In Hebrews chapter 9, the Greek text of Nestle reads (margin v. 25), eis ta hagia ton hagion, "into the holies of the holies," and (v. 3), hagia hagion, "holies of holies."

Just as the two holy places in the tabernacle are called the holies of holies, so the last two eons are often called the eons of the eons. As the tabernacle illustrated man's approach to God, it corresponds closely with the eonian times, which also brings man to God. The "holy of holies" was a single holy place. The "eon of eons," a single eon. It was the pre-eminence of the "holy of holies," in relation to the other holy places, which caused it to be so designated. So the pre-eminence of the "eon of the eons" lies in its being the fruitage and harvest of previous eons. The same is true of the "holies of the holies" of Heb. 9:25. They may be likened to the "eons of the eons" of Rev. 11:15; 22:5. Luke 1:33 says of Christ's "kingdom there shall be no end." While the kingdom itself will not end, the reign of Christ for the eons of the eons will end when He delivers up the kingdom to the Father (1 Cor. 15:24-26).

According to the Bible any "hell" will be "kolasis aionian" which means age-during corrective chastisement.

http://www.tentmaker.org/books/asw/Chapter11.html

It is limited in duration, and corrective in purpose.

http://www.savior-of-all.com/aionian.html

The argument about “eternal hell” always ends with the words, “My Greek scholars are more reliable than your Greek scholars,” and the result is always a stalemate.

If you think it glorifies God more to let some of His creatures suffer forever, then you keep believing that.

But if you think it glorifies God more to eventually meet everyone on the level of their greatest and deepest need which is a change in their stubborn will, then know that there is plenty of evidence in the Bible that that is exactly what God is like.
rodgertutt

[rodgertutt]

Originally Posted by JM

To take from your first post above Roger..

" Jesus died on the cross and rose from the dead to guarantee that any necessary "kolasis aionian" (age-during corrective chastisement) will be 100% effective in changing wrong attitudes. All acts of sin have been forgiven for everyone. Attitudes cannot be forgiven. Attitudes must change. This is what the lake of fire which is the second death will do. It will last no longer than God sees is good for everyone involved. Google up "

Oh so God can forgive Acts of Sin but Actions and Attitudes are Seperate. God cant forgive that.. OH no.. lol... the action was not done out of an Attitude.. Please.... this just gets more and more absurd by the minute!!..

Jesus now came to pay for acts done, and Jesus clears up attitudes by laying out laws that people must follow ( REQUIREMENTS) and if they are not followed..

A quick DUNK in the Lake of Fire will sort out the Attitudes.. Just like dunking a piece of dirty Copper into a Cleaner... and out they come Never to have the same attitudes again because their FREE will is no longer in effect lol..

Please... ACTIONS AND ATTITUDES... now we really are Splitting Hairs for the sake of WHICH RELIGIOUS INTERPRETATION of a book is right..

God can forgive having had wrong attitudes, but He can't forgive maintaining wrong attitudes. Wrong attitudes MUST CHANGE and they certainly will with or without the lake of fire which is the second death.

THE FALLACY OF "FREE WILL"

Sooner or later God's will superceeds man's stubborn will. Click on

Is Man a Free Moral Agent - J. Preston Eby

[rodgertutt]

SALVATION OUT OF THE LAKE OF FIRE WHICH IS THE SECOND DEATH

EVERYONE IS GOING TO HEAVEN – SOME THROUGH THE FIRE – BUT ALL THROUGH THE BLOOD

Any hell that anyone will experience the Bible calls "kolasis aionian," which means age-during corrective chastisement.
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/asw/Chapter11.html

It is limited in duration, and corrective in purpose.
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/Aion_lim.html

According to the Bible everyone is going to heaven - some through the fire, but all through the blood.

http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/sa...ircularity.htm

We should desire to experience the lake of fire if God sees that is what we need. That's how much we can relax in the arms of God's love.

The process of salvation will be completed for the firstfruits of election, (the remnant chosen by grace), after the first resurrection. The process of salvation will be completed for the non-elect after the great white throne judgment. For some, it will include an experience in the lake of fire.
But everyone will be saved out of the lake of fire which is the second death.

You may ask, “What scriptural evidence is there of being saved out of the lake of fire which is the second death?"

There actually is much evidence.

Although the book of Revelation is the last book placed in the Bible, it is not the final revelation of what God is going to do with humanity. The apostle Paul saw way beyond John.

Col.1:25 of which I became a dispenser, in accord with the administration of God, which is granted to me for you, to complete the word of God

There is much evidence that Paul did see way beyond John. For instance, in Revelation there are still kings reigning, and Christ is still reigning along with His followers. There are still sovereignties and powers in force throughout the book of revelation. So John did not see the day when all sovereignty, authority and power would be done away. Paul did. If you will look at 1Corinthians 15:24-28 Paul saw the day when all of these would be done away. He sees the day when "He should be nullifying all sovereignty, authority and power" (vs.24)

Paul sees the day when Christ will quit reigning (vs.25).

Paul sees the day when death (all death which includes the second death) will be abolished (vs.26). Please remember that death will be abolished **after** all the sovereignties, authorities and powers in Revelation have been nullified. Within the book of Revelation, death is still operational as are the afore mentioned powers.

So what is going to happen to all these people who are in death when death is abolished?

They will come forth vivified (made alive beyond the reach of death) (1Cor.15:22).

They will have their lives justified and will be constituted righteous:

Romans 5:18 Consequently, then, as it was through one offense for all mankind for condemnation, thus also it is through one just award for all mankind for life's justifying.
Romans 5:19 For even as, through the disobedience of the one man, the many were constituted sinners, thus also, through the obedience of the One, the many shall be constituted just.

All will be reconciled to God (Col.1:20)

All will be headed up in Christ (Eph.1:10)

All will bow the knee in the name of Jesus and acclaim with their tongue that "Jesus Christ is Lord" to the glory of God, the Father (Phil.2:9-11).
And we know that anyone who acclaims that Jesus Christ is Lord, especially when it is to God's glory without any hypocrisy is saved for 1Corinthians 12:3 says so.

So there is proof that people will go to the second death **when ** the new earth comes. And there is proof that this is not the final goal God has for these people.

In summary then:
The lake of fire is the second death.
The apostle John did not see into the future as far as the apostle Paul.
How do I know this? and what ramifications does this have as to whether or not one gets out of the lake of fire...the second death? Plenty.
In the book of revelation Christ is still reigning; death is still operational; sovereignties, authorities and powers are still in force.
In 1Cor.15:22-28 Paul sees way beyond John's revelation.
He sees the day when Christ will quit reigning (1Cor.15:25).
He sees the day when all sovereignties, authorities and powers are nullified (1Cor.15:24).
He sees the day when death is abolished (1Cor.15:26) and all are then subjected to Christ then Christ is subjected to God and then God is All in all (1Cor.15:28).
So, yes, there is scripture which intimates that all in the lake of fire will come forth and God will be All in all.
Also in 1Cor.15:22 all are dying and in Christ shall all be vivified. So this happens after death for most.
Also in Romans 5:18,19 you have what happens to all mankind due to what Adam did which happens to the exact same all mankind due to what Christ did. But it does not happen to all at the exact same time.
Each in his own order.

http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/sa...fFire-Eby.html

http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/sa...orld/index.htm

[shibboleth]

"I created most of you for the purpose of torturing you forever. However, I am going to choose a few of you undeserving ones to go to heaven where you will be happy forever." John Calvin said there will be infants a span long in hell because they were not among the elect. (A span is the distance between the tip of the thumb to the tip of the little finger.)

Rodger, do you happen to know which book the quote from Calvin is about hell being a span long with infants? The reason I ask is that it was used as a proof text on an ET site that Calvin believed babies went to hell and the guy who quoted it and I couldn't find it in Calvins writings. Do you know exactly where it came from? Also, didn't Jonathan Edwards say babies went to hell in his writings? We couldn't find that one either.

[rodgertutt]

Originally Posted by shibboleth

Rodger, do you happen to know which book the quote from Calvin is about hell being a span long with infants? The reason I ask is that it was used as a proof text on an ET site that Calvin believed babies went to hell and the guy who quoted it and I couldn't find it in Calvins writings. Do you know exactly where it came from? Also, didn't Jonathan Edwards say babies went to hell in his writings? We couldn't find that one either.

Although I don't know in which of his writings the statement is written, it does make sense that Calvin believed it since he believed in Unconditional election not depending on human choice, and in a Limited atonement that was only efficatious for the elect who were chosen by God to be saved. His belief in the Total depravity of humans would also place non-elect infants in hell since I am not aware of any evidence that he believed in annihilation. Also the wording "infants a span long" is unique and if Calvin didn't say it, some other theologian probably did. I first heard that Calvin said it back in the 1950s when I was going to Bible school.

I had not heard that Jonathan Edwards said it although I wouldn't be surprised since he had a very cruel perception of God as manifested in his writing Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.

[shibboleth]

Jonathan Edwards

“The view of the misery of the damned will double the ardour of the love and gratitude of the saints of heaven.”

The sight of hell torments will exalt the happiness of the saints forever. . .Can the believing father in Heaven be happy with his unbelieving children in Hell. . . I tell you, yea! Such will be his sense of justice that it will increase rather than diminish his bliss.

["The Eternity of Hell Torments" (Sermon), April 1739 & Discourses on Various Important Subjects, 1738]

This is the quote by Edwards taken from the Tentmaker site. I couldn't find this quote in any of Edwards writings, although he did say a few things about little children going to hell. Anyway, he was just as cruel as Calvin in his hatred for "sinners."If you ever run across these quotes in a book or article would you let me know so I can print it on the ET site?