I like and respect the opinions and perspectives of everyone who discussed. I would just like to make it clear that salvation must be 100% from God, because if salvation is not 100% from God, then I can take credit for it, but that's the end of it. Arminianism defends human dignity. Calvinism protects the glory of God. So you can choose. If I had to label myself, I am a Calvinist for this reason. Michael from the Czech Republic
@@KYWingfold It is that my theology is not yours because you want to defend human dignity and place more emphasis on the synergy between God's grace and human cooperation in deeds. But that's the end. This is absurd. This is the result of pride and human dignity.
@@DefenseofFaith nope. I'm simply stating that "works" did not mean in 1st century Judaism what it meant in the 16th century reformation, nor what it means today. You have to see how and why the word was applied, what the Gospel is, etc. EVERY Church father affirmed a form of libertarian free will (provided by God's grace), up until the Pelagian controversy. That's 300+ years of early church. It's not prideful to hold to the scriptures and how the earliest Church documents interpreted them.
If a being’s existence ends, we cannot say that its punishment is eternal. To not exist is to have no properties, including that of undergoing punishment. On Date’s view, one could say, 2 million years in the future, “x, who was annihilated 1.9 million years ago, is still being punished.” This is logically incoherent, even on deprivation of value. One has to exist to be deprived of something.
I don't think there's any dissonance at all. The eternal punishment is death. Man was meant to live forever in the state of the garden and that is revoked as punishment to those who choose their rebellion. They are cut off from their ability to sin. Eternal punishing or eternal affliction isn't what the texts says. I think there is much more dissonance to say that the lost is immortal. You would have to bend over and over with the texts describing the fate of the lost as "death" , "destruction" , "reduced to ashes" , "will be no more" , "brought to a sudden end" and make it fit eternal affliction. The word compares soddom and Gomorrahs destruction as well as the flood as examples to anticipate the fate of the lost. Christ quotes Isiah 66 24 to describe Gehenna in Mark's gospel which is objectively and image of annihilation. 2nd timothy says Jesus Christ our Savior has abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. The bible says soul and body are destroyed in Gehenna in Matthew. The outpouring of God's wrath placed on Christ so that we can walk free from the sentence of sinners was to violenty put him to death. How do we call him our substitute if according to tradition the risen lost will never be put to death?
Can we get a copy of your masters thesis? I did an independent study with Dr. Walls last year that was very enlightening. I’d love to check your work out.
Im not going to watch the video, but I came to ask, I thought date was making another book on hell with a few other people, or am I mistaken and he was just talking of rethinking hell in a podcast I heard? Also, is rethinking hell worth the read, or would I be good to just buy “the fire that consumes”? Appreciate it!
Many people cannot not see some suspect theological view in scripture. Dale Tuggy sees Unitarianism as self evident in scripture. Gentile Messianic Christians who believe one must follow Torah to rightly relate to Yahweh see that teaching as clear in scripture as well. It is possible to be so in the grip of a framework that we can’t evaluate the evidence otherwise. And yes, this cuts both ways.
I find Date hugely dishonest. He said around the 31 minute mark that he would prefer to experience misery forever than be annihilated. No one would truly prefer to suffer in torment and misery forever and ever rather than be annihilated.
THIS IS HOW WE KNOW HELL DOESN'T EXIST AS IT IS A LOGICAL IMPOSSIBILITY: 1. According to Jesus you must love your neighbour as yourself, you must forgive your neighbour and you must treat your neighbour as an equal to enter heaven. 2. Heaven is an eternal paradise with no sin or suffering. Now look at the logical impossibility of those two statements: You are supposed to be eternally happy with no suffering and in order to get there you love your neighbour, forgive your neighbour and treat your neighbour as an equal. Explain this then, if you love, forgive and consider your neighbour equal how does god propose to give you eternal happiness if, according to the gods rules, you are supposed to be in eternal suffering because your neighbour is being eternally punished? How could you conform to Jesus' rules if you couldn't care less about people suffering in an eternal fiery pit? And the logical impossibility is therefore this: A god cannot supply a heaven without suffering and, at the same time, have a hell e.g. Mummy loves Adolf Hitler, how does she get a happy suffering free heaven with Adolf burning in hell? She can't. Hence if god is true to its word, it will have to deliver Adolf to mummy Hitler to give her the eternal suffering free paradise it promised her. And the same goes for everyone else in heaven and hell i.e. you end up with no hell. So what was all the worshiping for? Like everything else theist, the god inventors weren't smart enough to think anything out logically. What reason does an atheist have to fear hell? And what's the point of a theist trying to get into heaven?
Read Walls’ book The Logic of Damnation it’s a good overview of the philosophical issues. Honestly, All of these questions have been asked and answered from the patristics onward.
@@kevinwells7080 Why would I read a nonsense from a theist, that is reserved for the gullible and deluded? Simply put, obfuscation around a subject you obviously couldn't possibly have an actual answer to as only a god itself could adequately counter it only serves to prove it lacks honesty and integrity and is run on the basis of using lies and deception to convince the deluded. I am neither gullible nor deluded so all Walls book could offer me is a good laugh. Philosophy, doesn't apply to the bible. The bible tells you what it means in the bible, trying to manipulate that and claim it is philosophy is pointless. Or to put it another way, since there is no argument to defeat the concept I presented given it addresses the reality of what the scriptures actually say and the application of that in the real world, anything trying to defeat it must be a fallacy. If there is a god, only that god could argue it's way out of it, if that was possible. You need to understand, making stuff up to convince the deluded into believing something they already believe is only of value to those deluded and gullible enough to accept it. And based on the same glimpse of reality versus making stuff up you want to be true, none of these questions have been answered beyond the willingness of the deluded and gullible desire to believe them. I am yet to see any of these deceptions you call "answers" that I can't debunk.
Date has twisted Scripture well enough to get people confused. An idea that is not found in Scripture is created while the clear teaching of Scripture is questioned.
I gotta be honest, before even knowing what theology is, I thought the Bible clearly taught the soul is not immortal (and the only passage that makes me think it would be, is that revelation says the demons won’t die in the lake, otherwise, I can’t just see all of the Old Testament verses and some of the new, and totally flip to ECT neglecting those verses for the one in revelation).
Mark 9:48 talks about their worm never dying. The worm / Scolex here is talking about the worms that eat corpses. They will never die because the bodies will be permanently available. It also talks about a fire that will never be quenched. That's not because there is an infinite number of humans. There is a finite number of humans since earth's creation. However they will be alive forever. This is the only way that the fire will not be quenched.
@@noelenliva2670 the fact that these things never stop is to show that you can't escape hell or wait it out or have any way to remove yourself from there.
@@noelenliva2670 Jesus is quoting Isiah 66 24. It's says and they shall look upon the dead bodies of those who have rebelled against me. Their worm will not die and their fire will not be quenched. This will be an uphoranse to all flesh. Some translations say the worms that eat them will not die and the fire that burns them will not be put out. Unquenchable does not mean the fire will never go out. It means can't be put out. Like quenching your thirst. You put out your thirst. Soddom and Gomorrah was subject to Unquenchable fire. It could not be put out. Scripture where jesus is directly quoting from specifically says they are dead. Not alive like you said. On top of that the image from isiah 66 24 matches the image of a wasteland of dead bodies being eaten by animals and it being made an object of scorn from when God nicknamed the valley of hinnom the valley of slaughter in Jeremiah. After all when Christ said "hell" he reffered to the valley of himmon. This is what his Jewish audience would have had in mind when the valley of hinnom was spoken about. I have the oposite view ECT twists scripture so much it's sketchy. Death doesn't mean death. Destruction doesn't mean destruction. Perish doesn't mean perish. The bible says in 2nd Tim 1:10 Jesus Christ our Savior has abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. Immortality doesn't mean immortality either I guess. Its a doctrine of turning terms into catchphrases. The word says in 2nd Peter soddom and Gomorrah being reduced to ashes was made an Example of what is going to happen to the ungodly. How is that an example for ect? The word says in 2nd Peter again. By the the same word as the flood fire is reserved for the day of judgement and destruction of the ungodly. How does the flood look like ect? In luke it says just as lot left soddom it rained fire and brimstone and destroyed them all, it will be just like this at the reveal of the Son of man. How does that look like ect? It's giving us direct familiar refferences of literal destruction when Jesus returns. And then on top of that. Why did Christ die then? In my opinion this confirms the wages of sin being actual death. According to tradition the risen lost will never be violently put to death but rather being tormented forever body and soul is called death. How is Christ our substitute then? Wat does his death represent?
@@noelenliva2670I think twisting is death not meaning death, destruction not meaning destruction, perish not meaning perish, reduced to ashes not meaning reduced to ashes, will be no more not meaning will be no more, brought to a sudden end not meaning a sudden end, calling Christ our susbitute if the risen lost are never put to death. 2 Timothy 1:10 says Jesus Christ our Savior has abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. Immortality doesn't mean immortality either. That is lots of twisting.
I'm spreading the Good News: You don't have to believe in ancient mythology. You don't have to fear hell, because people made it up. Be good to yourself and others. Peace.
@@ChevySamk you have no idea about my worldview. And if your goodness is based on the Bible, woe to you. Slavery, genocide, rape, if God told you to sacrifice your child, would you? BTW, the Bible is fine with abortion, how about you?
I like and respect the opinions and perspectives of everyone who discussed. I would just like to make it clear that salvation must be 100% from God, because if salvation is not 100% from God, then I can take credit for it, but that's the end of it. Arminianism defends human dignity. Calvinism protects the glory of God. So you can choose. If I had to label myself, I am a Calvinist for this reason.
Michael from the Czech Republic
You should check out Bates’ book “Salvatuon by Allegiance Alone”
You’ve got some anachronistic views of works and faith.
@@KYWingfold It is that my theology is not yours because you want to defend human dignity and place more emphasis on the synergy between God's grace and human cooperation in deeds. But that's the end. This is absurd. This is the result of pride and human dignity.
@@DefenseofFaith nope. I'm simply stating that "works" did not mean in 1st century Judaism what it meant in the 16th century reformation, nor what it means today. You have to see how and why the word was applied, what the Gospel is, etc. EVERY Church father affirmed a form of libertarian free will (provided by God's grace), up until the Pelagian controversy. That's 300+ years of early church. It's not prideful to hold to the scriptures and how the earliest Church documents interpreted them.
@@KYWingfoldYou lack knowledge. You are not right. Have a good time
@@DefenseofFaith it's hard to have our beliefs challenged. All the best!
Post mortem opportunity makes sense to me. I just don't really see it in scripture this far.
Great convo! Molinism vs Calvinism would be a good one or an authority, infallibility, inerrancy chat
If a being’s existence ends, we cannot say that its punishment is eternal. To not exist is to have no properties, including that of undergoing punishment. On Date’s view, one could say, 2 million years in the future, “x, who was annihilated 1.9 million years ago, is still being punished.” This is logically incoherent, even on deprivation of value. One has to exist to be deprived of something.
I don't think there's any dissonance at all. The eternal punishment is death. Man was meant to live forever in the state of the garden and that is revoked as punishment to those who choose their rebellion. They are cut off from their ability to sin. Eternal punishing or eternal affliction isn't what the texts says. I think there is much more dissonance to say that the lost is immortal. You would have to bend over and over with the texts describing the fate of the lost as "death" , "destruction" , "reduced to ashes" , "will be no more" , "brought to a sudden end" and make it fit eternal affliction. The word compares soddom and Gomorrahs destruction as well as the flood as examples to anticipate the fate of the lost. Christ quotes Isiah 66 24 to describe Gehenna in Mark's gospel which is objectively and image of annihilation. 2nd timothy says Jesus Christ our Savior has abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. The bible says soul and body are destroyed in Gehenna in Matthew. The outpouring of God's wrath placed on Christ so that we can walk free from the sentence of sinners was to violenty put him to death. How do we call him our substitute if according to tradition the risen lost will never be put to death?
Can we get a copy of your masters thesis? I did an independent study with Dr. Walls last year that was very enlightening. I’d love to check your work out.
Im not going to watch the video, but I came to ask, I thought date was making another book on hell with a few other people, or am I mistaken and he was just talking of rethinking hell in a podcast I heard?
Also, is rethinking hell worth the read, or would I be good to just buy “the fire that consumes”?
Appreciate it!
Many people cannot not see some suspect theological view in scripture. Dale Tuggy sees Unitarianism as self evident in scripture. Gentile Messianic Christians who believe one must follow Torah to rightly relate to Yahweh see that teaching as clear in scripture as well. It is possible to be so in the grip of a framework that we can’t evaluate the evidence otherwise. And yes, this cuts both ways.
Walls, setting definitely has a wizard ambiance.
The question is whether immortality is an essential property of personal beings.
ECT is not an essential property of a belief in hell. At least not the T part.
I find Date hugely dishonest. He said around the 31 minute mark that he would prefer to experience misery forever than be annihilated.
No one would truly prefer to suffer in torment and misery forever and ever rather than be annihilated.
THIS IS HOW WE KNOW HELL DOESN'T EXIST AS IT IS A LOGICAL IMPOSSIBILITY:
1. According to Jesus you must love your neighbour as yourself, you must forgive your neighbour and you must treat your neighbour as an equal to enter heaven.
2. Heaven is an eternal paradise with no sin or suffering.
Now look at the logical impossibility of those two statements: You are supposed to be eternally happy with no suffering and in order to get there you love your neighbour, forgive your neighbour and treat your neighbour as an equal. Explain this then, if you love, forgive and consider your neighbour equal how does god propose to give you eternal happiness if, according to the gods rules, you are supposed to be in eternal suffering because your neighbour is being eternally punished? How could you conform to Jesus' rules if you couldn't care less about people suffering in an eternal fiery pit?
And the logical impossibility is therefore this: A god cannot supply a heaven without suffering and, at the same time, have a hell e.g. Mummy loves Adolf Hitler, how does she get a happy suffering free heaven with Adolf burning in hell? She can't. Hence if god is true to its word, it will have to deliver Adolf to mummy Hitler to give her the eternal suffering free paradise it promised her. And the same goes for everyone else in heaven and hell i.e. you end up with no hell. So what was all the worshiping for?
Like everything else theist, the god inventors weren't smart enough to think anything out logically. What reason does an atheist have to fear hell? And what's the point of a theist trying to get into heaven?
Read Walls’ book The Logic of Damnation it’s a good overview of the philosophical issues. Honestly, All of these questions have been asked and answered from the patristics onward.
Have you ever had sadness turn to joy?
@@kevinwells7080 Why would I read a nonsense from a theist, that is reserved for the gullible and deluded? Simply put, obfuscation around a subject you obviously couldn't possibly have an actual answer to as only a god itself could adequately counter it only serves to prove it lacks honesty and integrity and is run on the basis of using lies and deception to convince the deluded. I am neither gullible nor deluded so all Walls book could offer me is a good laugh.
Philosophy, doesn't apply to the bible. The bible tells you what it means in the bible, trying to manipulate that and claim it is philosophy is pointless.
Or to put it another way, since there is no argument to defeat the concept I presented given it addresses the reality of what the scriptures actually say and the application of that in the real world, anything trying to defeat it must be a fallacy. If there is a god, only that god could argue it's way out of it, if that was possible.
You need to understand, making stuff up to convince the deluded into believing something they already believe is only of value to those deluded and gullible enough to accept it.
And based on the same glimpse of reality versus making stuff up you want to be true, none of these questions have been answered beyond the willingness of the deluded and gullible desire to believe them. I am yet to see any of these deceptions you call "answers" that I can't debunk.
@@oldbenkenob1 That is irrelevant to my comment.
Date has twisted Scripture well enough to get people confused. An idea that is not found in Scripture is created while the clear teaching of Scripture is questioned.
I gotta be honest, before even knowing what theology is, I thought the Bible clearly taught the soul is not immortal (and the only passage that makes me think it would be, is that revelation says the demons won’t die in the lake, otherwise, I can’t just see all of the Old Testament verses and some of the new, and totally flip to ECT neglecting those verses for the one in revelation).
Mark 9:48 talks about their worm never dying. The worm / Scolex here is talking about the worms that eat corpses. They will never die because the bodies will be permanently available.
It also talks about a fire that will never be quenched. That's not because there is an infinite number of humans. There is a finite number of humans since earth's creation. However they will be alive forever. This is the only way that the fire will not be quenched.
@@noelenliva2670 the fact that these things never stop is to show that you can't escape hell or wait it out or have any way to remove yourself from there.
@@noelenliva2670 Jesus is quoting Isiah 66 24. It's says and they shall look upon the dead bodies of those who have rebelled against me. Their worm will not die and their fire will not be quenched. This will be an uphoranse to all flesh. Some translations say the worms that eat them will not die and the fire that burns them will not be put out. Unquenchable does not mean the fire will never go out. It means can't be put out. Like quenching your thirst. You put out your thirst. Soddom and Gomorrah was subject to Unquenchable fire. It could not be put out. Scripture where jesus is directly quoting from specifically says they are dead. Not alive like you said. On top of that the image from isiah 66 24 matches the image of a wasteland of dead bodies being eaten by animals and it being made an object of scorn from when God nicknamed the valley of hinnom the valley of slaughter in Jeremiah. After all when Christ said "hell" he reffered to the valley of himmon. This is what his Jewish audience would have had in mind when the valley of hinnom was spoken about. I have the oposite view ECT twists scripture so much it's sketchy. Death doesn't mean death. Destruction doesn't mean destruction. Perish doesn't mean perish. The bible says in 2nd Tim 1:10 Jesus Christ our Savior has abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. Immortality doesn't mean immortality either I guess. Its a doctrine of turning terms into catchphrases. The word says in 2nd Peter soddom and Gomorrah being reduced to ashes was made an Example of what is going to happen to the ungodly. How is that an example for ect? The word says in 2nd Peter again. By the the same word as the flood fire is reserved for the day of judgement and destruction of the ungodly. How does the flood look like ect? In luke it says just as lot left soddom it rained fire and brimstone and destroyed them all, it will be just like this at the reveal of the Son of man. How does that look like ect? It's giving us direct familiar refferences of literal destruction when Jesus returns. And then on top of that. Why did Christ die then? In my opinion this confirms the wages of sin being actual death. According to tradition the risen lost will never be violently put to death but rather being tormented forever body and soul is called death. How is Christ our substitute then? Wat does his death represent?
@@noelenliva2670I think twisting is death not meaning death, destruction not meaning destruction, perish not meaning perish, reduced to ashes not meaning reduced to ashes, will be no more not meaning will be no more, brought to a sudden end not meaning a sudden end, calling Christ our susbitute if the risen lost are never put to death. 2 Timothy 1:10 says Jesus Christ our Savior has abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. Immortality doesn't mean immortality either. That is lots of twisting.
I'm spreading the Good News:
You don't have to believe in ancient mythology. You don't have to fear hell, because people made it up.
Be good to yourself and others. Peace.
Christ is lord!
there is no root for goodness in your worldview. it's all material
@@ChevySamk you have no idea about my worldview.
And if your goodness is based on the Bible, woe to you. Slavery, genocide, rape, if God told you to sacrifice your child, would you?
BTW, the Bible is fine with abortion, how about you?