Finally!!!... a debate that is conducted with kindness and respect, without arrogance, and without insulting each other! Both of these gentlemen exhibited very Christ-like attitudes! A Christian debate shouldn't be about "winning", but we should always keep an open discussion, which encourages a deeper understanding!
Christ like attitude love.....then later you’re going to hell because you used your brain to come to a conclusion that the stories in the bible don’t lign up with reality and reject what was written in a book collected by men
Debates should be about truth presented in the best light and in the best manner. ..and since truth always wins, yes, debates should be about winning. Truth-speakers need not insult and demean in the process of putting out solid truth. But if they did, they'd be in good company with prophets, apostles and even Christ Himself. (just sayin'...)
I'll give Phil this much. He at least seemed more gracious toward Chris in debating with him than most traditionalists are when they argue with a conditionalist. There was another debate I once witnessed in which the eternal torment proponent actually told the conditionalist that he was going to enjoy watching him burn. It was sick. Phil is at least not going off with accusations of Bible rejecting or heresy or something on Chris here. He even admits at about 1:42:00 that he believes Chris is trying to make a solid Biblically-based argument. You won't hear a lot of traditionalists be so accommodating.
+Trevor Martin I totally agree. It seems like to be empathetic, compassionate, or objective is considered heresy nowadays. I'm with you, I'm going to attempt to love everyone whether they accept my perspectives or not.
+SarahsKnight0 Yes, and I see that in a lot of comments on these videos too. "Traditionalists" often get angry and hurl insults and accusations at conditionalists which certainly isn't Christ-like behavior! But at least this man was respectful.
CherryFrog321 Yeah, it's insane. I just recently had a friend straight up tell me that I reject Christ on account of not believing the traditional view of hell. ... Even after she questioned why I believe in conditional immortality and I gave her perfectly rational, Scriptural reasons for it. Afterward it was obvious she didn't hear a word I said, and just insisted that eternal torment is true because Christ "talked about hell more than anything else" (when He actually really didn't), and so if I reject part of Christ's teachings, then I reject all of Him. I just said I would not tolerate being called a false believer for such a petty reason, and pulled out of the conversation. ... but at least with Phil, he and Chris appear to be friends and he respects Chris' position even though he disagrees with it.
Wow that's terrible! I hear that all the time too though. I often get, "are you calling Jesus a liar?" No, of course we don't think he was lying...we just think that the traditionlist view is misinterpreting what he said concering the fate of the lost.
@@LilacDaisy2 dude... the word "fear" in the bible means utter and total respect. Look it up. Like the wife must fear her husband. You keep your wife in fear?? Cuz tjats some messed up exegesis.
Disgusting. God doesnt want people following Him out of fear. That is such preversion of Gods character. He wants people to follow Him because they value His ways and righteousness! Not out of fear!
If one acknowledges everything summarized by Chris Date in his final comments, and I mean actually study it thoroughly, you will believe God and His word, if you are honest. The lost will be annihilated. END OF STORY. Now let's exercise the Spirit and win some souls to Christ!
So, when revelation 14 says they have no rest day nor night, they cease to exist, and find rest? No, that is not what it says, ut says they have no rest day nor night, ut says nothing about them being annihilated. Revelation 14:11 King James Version 11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
The guy that stands up at 2:09:35 was DRAMATICALLY shaking his head several times when Chris was speaking, and then stands up and essentially says that Chris has the wrong spirit about him. REALLY???!!! How about not dramatically shaking your head for the rest of the audience to see that you don't approve?!!! (disrespectful)... sorry, he just came off as "one of those guys"!
the church have taught for 2000 years the false traditional doctrine of eternal punishment, what did yeshua say 8'THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME. 9'BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.'" Mark 7:7 Their worship of me is useless, because they teach man-made rules as if they were doctrines.'
Most people also believed the earth was flat for thousands of years... we only know what we can observe, in the case of the bible we were left a testament, God provided it would be enough of a testimony, along with the world being a testimony to his existance. If we look at the world and the Bible, it seems that the wages of sin, is death. And that death is exactlg that unless we believe in Jesus and take part in the ressurection. Think about it, wed be experiencing souls of our loves ones all the time if they were sitting by God LITERALLY - WHAT BETTER TESTIMONY than your dead grandma coming to tell u about heaven? But its likely the case that the soul sleeps or goes to rest in God before the time of judgment. Our breath of life psyche comes from God, so does our Pneuma -spirit - and our body is " moulded clay" and to dust it will return
I rejected Christ for 20 years and eternal conscious torment was a HUGE reason why. I used to say ask " How can I be happy in heaven if others don't make it and are tortured for eternity. I also wondered where Christians heart are that defend traditional hell. Thank God I found Edward Fudge lecture
This is a HUGE consideration when assessing the eternal torment doctrine. It is so outrageous, it makes so little sense, that many would be driven away from salvation by its unreasonable character. Those who push this poison character assassination of God will one day face the reality that they murdered people with their lies. Sad.
@Sir_Valion I agree. I was overjoyed when I fell on Edward Fudges lecture, then binged watched Chris Date. What angers me is fellow Christians that defend the doctrine like it's their child and go as far as to say you're a heretic for believing Conditional immortality. They bend scripture with mental gymnastics to the point that death mean living forever.
You rejected Christ because of the punishment that sinners face? And if they face it for all eternity what of it? Is God not allowed to Judge accordingly too how He pleases? Is He not both creator and Good, while we are creation and fallen that needed Him to redeem us? We couldn't even redeem ourselves, yet so many want to demand that God has no right to do what He very well can justly do. Thanks be to God He sent His only begotten Son Jesus to redeem us so that we who are saved do not have to save what we deserve.
Not too mention making God out to be a completely sadistic psychopath. To accuse Him of such character should require absolute undeniable proof. This satanic lie has done more to blaspheme His name and character than anything anyone has ever done. It's prevented untold millions from accepting Him and has done great harm to the psyche of those who do believe in it.
chris won this debate hands down by quoting the bible, phil's whole argument was "the word death, perish, and destroy dont really mean death, perish, or destroy but mean seperation from gog". BALONY, if these words dont REALLY mean what they say then maybe "forgiveness, salvation, eternal life" , etc DONT really mean what they say either? if so then the entire bible doesnt really mean what it says.
+jamesb7777a Your view of language and how it works is incredible naive and misinformed. Any exegete worth their salt will tell you that. Obviously, you have no language training whatsoever. The Greek word apollumi conveys injury, destruction, or final end of earthly existence. Your comments display a general lack of education in this area. Hate to be so blunt but you were so kind to Phil I thought you would appreciate a similar style.
+Ed Dingess I have studied the origional languages, and actually apollumi, in its first and most often used meaning - means destroy, death. (By far widespread in the bible and in historical writings).
You performed admirably on that debate, Chris. It was very revealing to have heard Dr. Fernandez recognizing that it is unbiblical to hold that the lost will live eternally. The best solution he could come up with was by equivocating between the meaning of life and existence.
I feel like crying while listening to this man defending eternal punishment. He said that it was fear of hell that made him to believe in Christ. 😭 That broke my heart! Imagine Jesus listening to this after the sacrifice of love He did for us, what motivated this man was actually fear of condemnation and not His unconditional love and unspeakable gift grace! I pray that people will turn from this wrong notion of hell and seek the only true love in Christ Jesus, our Redeemer. I’m devastated! May God use me to help Brazilians (my fellow people) to rethink hell and seek Jesus for His incomparable goodness and beyond explanation peace. Let us be ministers of reconciliation not threatening.
But don’t you think it’s both? Shouldn’t the lost be afraid of hell? I think it’s everything, fear of hell and appreciation for what Christ did for us. Without that fear we wouldn’t appreciate his sacrifice! It’s like someone saving your life from drowning and telling them “ I was never afraid of draining!”
So, did these people find rest, and cease to exist, or do they have no rest day nor night? Only one is true, and the other one is a false teaching. Revelation 14:11 King James Version 11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
Wasn't it always about death, since the original sin? "but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die."
Yeah, and you would think that if eternal torment were really the penalty for sin, God would have warned Adam and Eve about that. But he only told them that they would die and "turn to dust." He certainly didn't tell them that they'd go to a horrible place and exist there eternally.
@@CherryFrog321 Just because it wasn't revealed to them, doesn't meN it isn't true. There are a lot of things in the Bible, that have been revealed thousands of years later. Like the law, it wasn't revealed to Adam and Eve either, but that doesn't mean it wasn't revealed later.
CS Lewis and his Anglican denomination of 72 million, believes in Annihilation. Billions of years of torture seems excessive. "An eye for an eye" and "39 lashes" was the Old Covenant's limit to punishment other than stoning.
Really lovely to listen to a rational,respectful debate between two brothers who hold diametrically opposing views, but still remain loving and caring of each other. I'm ok now,but quite recently i was close to walking away from Christianity because of the disunity between fellow Christians. Telling each other they were going to hell,calling each other heretics etc simply because they interpreted certain scriptures differently. I've seen it here in the comment section. It is absolutely unacceptable. I beseech you my brothers and sisters,take this debate as an example of how we should reason with each other. God bless you all.
Viewpoints aside, Chris is a much better speaker and debater. Phil's arguments were full of fallacies. Appeal to tradition, appeal to authority, post hoc &c.
Each man believes the Bible is the sole and ultimate authority, the final arbiter of revealed truth; and each man becomes, in effect, his own final authority by deciding what it says. As God's definitive revelation, Scripture happens to be chalk-full of subtlety and complexity, at least to the appearance of our limited human intelligence. The Scripture is the sole source of (the content of) revealed truth -- and it is intelligible, otherwise God wouldn't have revealed it to us. This is not an intractable puzzle: the Bible is infallibly true and intelligible, but even to reasonable, learned, faith-filled men it can seem to teach very different things, even on important issues like what happens after we die. Thanks be to God that He gave us also a Church as a supreme custodian of the Word of God -- indeed this Church gave us the Bible -- "And the gates of Hell will not prevail against it." In no place within the Bible does it say that the Bible is the ONLY authority. On the contrary, "hold fast to whatever is handed down, either by spoken word or by letter." Without twisting the words of Scripture and the will of God in the era of the final covenant, you cannot ignore that Jesus in the Bible inaugurates and confers a real authority. This is sometimes called the institutional church. It's not surprising that he entrusts the word of God to an organized community. Yes, take it on Scripture. Take it also as the Holy Spirit confirms for you the beautiful coherence and integrity of the truth which shines like a light. This does no prejudice to Scripture -- on the contrary, it preserves its truth and witness in its fullness, as God intended. Finally, I'll give a quick summary of what the Church teaches on this question. The Church takes the "Tradionalist" view. There a number of bible verses which, standing alone, support in a clear way both positions. For example, if we just had a verse or two on weeping and gnashing of teeth, or eternal fire (or eternal fill-in-the-blank), it would be clear evidence for eternal conscious torment. Or, on the other hand, if we just had Matthew 10:28 saying "... can destroy both body and soul in hell", it would be clear evidence for annihilationism. But we have both, and much more. So what to do? How to settle this question and still be fully accountable to Scripture as the source of revealed truth? If you take the 5-10 passages just from Matthew, most of which come from the lips of our Savior, they indicate with various descriptions and imagery the eternal and the conscious (and unpleasant) dimension of the afterlife for the unsaved. These passages, and all others that hail from the Gospel, must be given a special weight for (mostly) obvious reasons. Now what about the passages Chris pointed to? These must be read in light of what Christ says in the Gospel (and vice versa). A quick look at Matthew 10:28 reveals that it is directed at believers in connection with preaching the Gospel fearlessly -- "proclaim from the rooftops", "do not fear those who can only destroy the body," etc. A few lines later Jesus reminds them about the sparrow, how even this trivial bird is under the watchful providence of God. So Jesus is illustrating the power of God, God's providence, and exhorting awe and fear of the Lord and, finally, trust. There is a note of admonition, as if to confirm the testimony that comes to us from Paul, "Woe to me if I do not preach the Gospel!" The Holy Spirit inspires us and speaks in our hearts, not only for our own salvation but for the salvation of others, and woe to us if we do not preach this Gospel of Christ. So even if the line about God's ability to destroy both body and soul is a line confirming fear of the Lord; and if in fact it signifies annihilation, which seems clear; still the question is, "to what end"? Is Jesus defining or characterizing hell? Is he even emphasizing hell in any way whatsoever? Does he even say that this is what DOES or WILL happen in hell? Not at all. Even the literal sense is that God CAN destroy both body and soul, something human persecuters cannot accomplish, clearly emphasizing God's power. Again, standing alone it might be a different story, but it must be read in light of other passages which by comparison teach an almost crystal clear view of hell as eternal privation of God who is the source of all that is good. The same sort of exegesis applies to the other passages indicating annihilation; and, as Phil points out, the Greek words translated as "destruction" really do indicate in many cases something other than extinction or annihilation -- ruin, misery, catastrophe, rubble, to lay waste, etc., all of which perfectly describes the eternal separation from God characterized by conscious torment. Chris's argument about immortality is resolved by understanding life as a quality, or at least seeing the different senses in which the word is sometimes used. His argument from Atonement employs an exaggerated view of the penal substitutionary concept, and also ignores the fact that Jesus's greatest suffering on the Cross really was spiritual from separation from the Father.
Pointing out fallacies does not constitute an ad hominem attack. It rightly exposes the unsoundness of an argument. Besides, ad hominem would be calling into question Phil's arguments because of who he is as a person.
Keaton Smith Matthew 27:53 ► Verse (Click for Chapter) New International Version They came out of the tombs after Jesus' resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
If God is everywhere, and Hell is where God tortures people forever. How is hell the absence of God. God would have to be there eternally too? And if hell is the absence of God's love, but yet God is Love? The only way to be truly separated from God forever is annihilationism.
How could you be genuinely happy and full of love with both man and God in heaven if you knew that this same God was keeping many of your loved ones, family and friends supernaturally alive for the sole purpose of them to eternally experience unimaginable pain, unbearable torture in darkness with lonely abandonment WITH NO POSSIBLE END to their torment?? That sort of sadism makes Hitler look like Mother Teresa and certainly doesn’t sound like the loving Jesus I know or the joy filled heaven He has awaiting us.
The argument saying that if this doctrine on hell is wrong it could lead to other doctrines coming under attack shows that Phil comes from a position of fear and feels uncomfortable if his orderly house of tradition would fall apart. It is way easier and more comfortable to stick with an established tradition than to face reality that might point to weak points in it. It’s like the Titanic that could never sink and putting one’s trust in the accomplishments of mankind instead of God. Our traditions are not worth the paper they might be printed on, all those Catholic ideas we adopted from the Roman Catholic Church, unless they can be proven over and over again. Many traditions remained in the church not because they are true but because over nearly two thousand years most people didn’t have the means to investigate them more thoroughly. These traditions have become so ingrained in our culture that we often blindly accept them as established truth because it just seems so common sense to us. We should take a warning from the Pharisees at the time of Jesus who were in the same dilemma. They had so many traditions they didn’t challenge anymore because they were deeply ingrained in their thinking that they failed to recognise their messiah when he stood right in front of them.
Just because the historical christian church has largely believed in eternal conscious torment; that doesn't make it true Phil. The population don't determine true.
It's founded on eternal soul, which isn't biblical in my studies. When Adam fell, he returns to the dust, as dust. Only those who believe have life in them, and will be raised up at the last day.
Yeah especially when you find out that the idea of eternal torment didn't come uo until the 5th century by st augustine who used eternal hell as a way to get people to support the catholic church
@@HerveyShmervy - what a stupid thing to say. Daniel, Isaiah, Revelation and Matthew explicitly reference a fiery torment for God's enemies. Augustine came 300+ years after the latest Bible author.
Yeah his argument is an appeal to authority fallacy and/or argumentum ad populum it's not a logical argument as the majority has been and can be wrong. You can also call this group think which a lot of Christians tend to do and claim it's the Holy spirit talking to them when really it's something they just all agreed upon especially when they're ignorant of what the Bible actually teaches. If you have no good argument to refute their claim likely you'll just agree with what's said.
In a sense, "cessation of life" is what's thrown into the lake. Remember, this is symbolic imagery; death and Hades are the fourth horseman of the apocalypse from chapter 6, and it gives up its dead in 20 and then is thrown into the lake of fire, where we have to assume it, too, is tormented for eternity if we're going to assume everything else thrown into it is. But it symbolizes the end of the cessation of life, after the wicked have died the second death.
I think Dr. Fernandes and Chris Date were both admirably gracious in this debate! Thankful for you both! As I see it, the biblical case for conditional immortality is overwhelming, and so I don't fault Phil as a debater for having lost the debate. While I think the annihilationist case here came out clearly on top, I think both men did a great job representing their respective views. Good job, brothers! It's important that we have this debate with both charity and sharp clarity.
The spirit behind Chris' message is this: we should LOVE Christ because he died for us, gave us a moral code, and is here for us day in and day out. We should love him because he loved us, not because were terrified of the alternative: hell.
I have watched this entire video, and thoroughly enjoyed it. Thank you! :) It is wonderful to see two spirit-filled brothers having a godly and respectful debate. I admire them both! God bless them. I felt Mr Date presented an excellent case for annihilationism, though here are six of my own additional arguments, which I don't think Mr Date touched upon: *1. Incomplete atonement?* If the punishment for sin really is eternal torment, Jesus MUST be tortured forever, otherwise my atonement would be incomplete and void. *2. No mention of Satan's death in Scripture* Believers in eternal torment think that Satan's fate is "death and destruction" just like humans. Yet the Bible never once mentions anything about Satan dying, or angels perishing, or demons being destroyed. Is that just some HUGE coincidence? Or in fact do humans have a completely different fate to fallen angels, hence different langauge describing their fate. *3. The unholy trinity are not human* I do believe that Revelation speaks about eternal torment-but only for three individuals: Satan, the Antichrist and the false prophet (Rev 20:10). Since this unholy trinity will not be killed by the Lake of Fire, we can assume they are all angelic/immortal beings. Another clue is Rev 11:7 which says the Antichrist will originate from the Abyss-the Abyss is the prison for demons (Rev 20:1-2). *4. Fire kills people!* How exactly could someone be thrown into a lake of fire and survive it? That just doesn't make any sense. The only instance of humans surviving such a fate was in Daniel, but those men were under God's protection-unlike those in the Lake of Fire! *5. Equal punishment for all?* If every sinner received eternal torment then that would mean all sinners received EQUAL punishment! This stands in direct contrast with everything the scriptures say about God repaying each man according to what he has done. *6. Deceptive Jesus?* If eternal torment were true, it would be a HUGE DEAL and people would REALLY need to know about it! So wasn't it cruel and deceptive of Jesus to never mention it while He was on earth? He went around warning people about death, destruction and fire-clearly implying execution. If the truth were so much worse, why would He choose to only reveal it amidst all the symbolic language of Revelation, a book not even given to the saints until nearly a century after His death? *SAINTS IN HEAVEN?* As for people going to Heaven, I do not believe humans go to Heaven, which is why the Bible makes such a big deal about the Lord Jesus ascending to Heaven, since He is the only man to have ever done this and it is not normal (John 3:13). The rest of us will not see the Heavenly city of Jerusalem until after the judgement. Revelation 21:2 says that the city will come down prepared "like a bride for her husband". Clearly this will be the first time we've seen this city. If we had already been living there for thousands of years, this "bridal" description would not fit. Jesus said to the theif on the cross: "Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise". But it is only translators who place the comma there. It could be written: "Verily I say unto thee today: Thou shalt be with me in paradise Well, this is all just my humble opinion. These are surely not critical issues pertaining to salvation. I preach 7 steps of salvation: 1. Fear God, who is holy and righteous, and has appointed a day when He will judge all sinners 2. Repent and humble yourself 3. Call upon God's mercy, through Jesus Christ, who died to save sinners like you 4. Show that you are truly sorry, turning from all your evil ways 5. Be baptised into Jesus in water 6. Pray to receive the Holy Spirit, who will turn your life around and remake you into a new person 7. Remain faithful to Jesus, knowing that those who continue in obedient faith will inherit eternal Life
Read in Ezekiel what God does to Satan. And how about Revelation 20-21. 21 starts with no more sin etc. 20 ends with the last enemy, death and the grave being destroyed in the lake of fire.
+Lee Bee "Church of Christ" WORK out your own Salvation. Phil 2:12 NOW read verse 13. = Grace. Very Odd reasoning for a member of the "Church of Christ' Made a few good points. "Church of Christ' ?
Ezekiel 28:12-19 Fire and then "no more forever" also can be interpreted as no more until the ages of age. We know that the age of the earth comes to end. So when the bible used term like "aionios" it means age during. When that word is applied to God, we know he by DEFAULT exist with immortality so we take it in the literal sense that his age is endless. When the word aionios-translated in english as forever, we know that man is not immortal along with the planet earth so the age of his existence ends at the destruction of his soul along with the destruction of earth at the same event in Rev 20-9-10, psalms 37:20, Malachi 4:1-3. So when the word applied to the saved, why then do we mean it to be unending? Because Pauls message is based upon looking to receive this gift of immortality because of the incorruptible, glorified body we will receive during the resurrection and translation. 1Cor. Ch 15, 1 thess 4:17. Romans 2:7 With Christ there's life 1 John 5:12. No christ-no life
This is the same language Isaiah uses to describe dead corpses. Isaiah 66:24 “And they shall go forth and look Upon the corpses of the men Who have transgressed against Me. For their worm does not die, And their fire is not quenched. They shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.”
this is the problem I see alot of traditionalist ask well if you stop existing what's the big deal? to me it sounds like people should not really care about eternal life but only if they are threatened with eternal torture. it like they don't want to exist forever unless the oposite is eternal torture. Even if there is no eternal torture we should be extremely happy that we can get to exist in bliss without end. it's the ultimate freedom of will that God gave us. Before we existed he could not ask us do you want to exist forever? But after he created us he gives us this choice to exist and if we never wanted to exist in first place our free will is not taken away cuz we won't exist.
Mary worship has been accepted by the church for 1500 years, but Phil does not conclude that that doctrine should be accepted! While he finds it impossible to believe that the church could be wrong about ECT for the very same period!!!
Again, I explicitly said in my opening that suffering is part of the punishment. Looks like you may not have been listening very closely, or your bias is distorting what you hear. I explain degrees of punishment in my first and second rebuttal. Degrees of punishment is more consistent in conditionalism.
Chris Date Hello brother Chris,So This Debate is You Believe that Hell Exist ? And Phill believes Hell Does Not Exist ? God bless you and your family abundantly in Christ Jesus.
Chris Date Hello brother Chris,So This Debate is You Believe that Hell Exist ? And Phill believes Hell Does Not Exist ? God bless you and your family abundantly in Christ Jesus.
The “Community Rule” found with the Dead Sea Scrolls says that those who walk in the way of the spirit of truth will receive everlasting life, but those who walk in the way of the spirit of deceit will face the “disgrace of annihilation...suffering and bitter misery in dark abysses until they have been destroyed.” (Werner G. Werner, The Manual of Discipline (BRILL, 1957), 26.)
I didn't watch the entire debate, but I, like most have been raised with the traditionalist view of eternal torment. Lately I have have been seeing things in scripture that have made me wrestle with this notion. The obvious one that is sticking out to me right now is in Genesis 3 “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever-” I'm not sure when the idea came in that we are all eternal? It says plainly right there that we won't live forever. Thinking in light of this verse it makes what Jesus did more glorious to me by giving us eternal life who believe in Him. Am I missing something here? Did God somewhere along the way give sinners eternal life to torture them endlessly?
Trevor Alexander Ik right, I mean just please kill them god. What purpose do they serve in your universe other that to scream in pain. Imagine us creating an ai robot who was capable of having an experience and then programing him to feel pain, for doing something wrong that we programmed him To do.
I left ECT about a month and a half ago realizing we've inserted the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment.We must be honest with ourselves that Jesus...our King and Savior did a lousy job CLEARLY communicating mankind was already on there way to hell because of Adam and without it him it will stay that way and we will burn in hell forever...its never communicated once. Christ took the death penalty and had victory over death and the grave.Death is what Adam and Eve were cursed with...not eternal conscious torment...Jesus put a stop to it by defeating it...tasting death for all mankind If the wages for sin is eternal torture in hell....Penal Substitutionary Atonement is logically impossibe
I believe the Bible is clear that the living God is the Savior of All Mankind...especially those who believe That by Adam ALL die...we had 0...ZERO choice in the matter if in Adam we die but then we see so shall ALL in Christ live. 1 Corinthians 15 22 I dont believe this will be everyone at first but eventually I believe God's will for all to be saved will rule out
@@ttownsupreme2183 look at the next verse. The “all” being referred to are those who belong to Christ. “15:23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. “ the context of the chapter is the resurrection, not that all will eventually be reconciled. Those who are in Adam will die, but those who are in Christ the second Adam will live again.
Phil seems to think that soul sleep is only believed by "cult groups", however Martin Luther and several other reformation leaders believed in soul sleep and conditional immortality.
UNLEARN the lies Matthew 27:53 ► Verse (Click for Chapter) New International Version They came out of the tombs after Jesus' resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
It was Martin Luther's saying that death would be like going to sleep you wake up at the resurrection having no sense of the passage of time. Was where the concept of soul sleep came from.
@@jamesmccluskey7551care to make application of Mat27:53 to the Conditional Immortality vs ECT topic? I'm new to the subject and trying to understand Thank you.
I would agree he is good but that's because he has an easy position to defend here. On other topics I have seen him struggle, such as his debate with Steve Gregg on The Israel of God. It's easy to win with CI because ECT has no good arguments except tradition and orthodoxy, which are not arguments really anyway.
Phil says if he had believed in annihilation, he would not have come to Christ. This means he would not even care about eternal life unless there is eternal torment. What does that say ? To me it says he does not truly love God but fears eternal torment. People, we are not saved by fear. We are saved because we love God and fellowman. Yes we need to fear God. But that is not what saves us ! It is our LOVE ! So if a man says he would not come to Christ if it were not for the fear of eternal torment, what has saved him ? Fear or love ? I'm afraid too many people base their salvation on the wrong concept. Your faith and love of others is what Christ taught would give us eternal life. So in a nutshell, if you are living your life trying to just stay out of hell, you are not truly following Christ. Sorry, you are just trying to fake your way out of eternal torment and if it is true, that's where you will be ! Study your bibles everyday and learn. Godspeed !
+Sean Walsh Becareful of your interpretations, that they don't interfere with the reasonable concept of a loving and merciful God. A loving Creator does not force eternity, whether it be Heaven, "hell" or purgatory. The first thing the serpent said to Adam and Eve, when you eat from the tree of knowledge, "you shall certainly not die." Catholism, the oldest Christian religion, has taught of "default" immortality through the explanation of purgatory. In 325 AD, along with Roman Emporer Constantine, the pope also changed the Saturday sabbath to Sunday Lord's day.
Phil says at around 1:34 that he does not believe that those in hell would experience eternal life, he says that they are not living, the quality would not be what could be classified as living, however he says that the lost would have eternal consciousness in hell. see folks this is what a messed up theology does to you, this is how the devil can deceive even the most educated of persons, if something is conscious then it definitely has life. why do some theologians believe when you are knocked out you dont know anything, but when you are dead you are conscious of everything.
Hahahaha exactly. When did these words change to cause the confusion. It's like everyone knows what death means but they selectively change the meaning to suit the fancy of their EISEGESIS.
If you think it through, the fact that the language is confusing within the mind and presentation of the traditionalist PROVES there is something wrong in understanding which has been ignored because of how widespread the misinterpretation is so they let each other get away with it. Until a Conditionalist is apt to demand a coherent explanation. Chris' opening statement basically hinted that this would happen when he ended his first round by reminding the audience that interpretations must be held to the entire scripture on the topic, within context. And not piece meal, out of context, interpreted in context to tradition and presuppositional assumptions forced onto it.
This is a great debate, however I'm not a fan of the constant reference to beliefs of other people. I don't really see how that has to do with the doctrine itself. Whether something is right or wrong isn't dependent on who believes it.
There will be no day and night in Eternity! Day and Night are part of time.. When the new Heaven and Earth are created there will not even be a sun. Do you think that there will be day and night in Hell which is darkness?
Regarding Phil's point about the church not possibly getting it wrong for so many centuries. In every generation, theological traditions are passed down which inform our presuppositions, and people by nature want to stand on the shoulders of those theological giants who have gone before, and be in the correct, "biblical" camp. To step outside the box, or even raise a question, especially in reference to this issue, you risk being labeled a heretic and losing everything. This has also been true in every generation (including possibly losing your life earlier on), so it's no surprise that very few people dared to do this. Just look what's happening now when a few are speaking out.
Here's the what I've concluded with all due respect and humility. Jesus did not spend an eternal conscious suffering in Hell. Therefore the debt paid in our place was not eternal conscious suffering. Therefore Hell is not a place of eternal conscious suffering. Either you believe Jesus suffered in our place or you don't. If Hell is a place of eternal conscious suffering, and Jesus spent only 3 days there, then the debt was not paid in full. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure it's a terrible experience, but punishments need to fit crimes.
For those who dont know, a major problem with Christian physicalism is it poses a problem with regard to the Law of Identity. Once a person dies, he ceases to exist completely. Any future "resurrection" would not be the revivification of the original person, but a creation of a mere copy (identical as the copy may be). It really isn't the same person. In which case, that new person shouldnt be punished because he hasnt committed his own sins. Besides, the original already Died (i.e punished).
Traditionalists, including Dr. Fernandes in this video, argues that by virtue of being both divine and human, Jesus' finite punishment of torment is the equivalent of the eternal torment awaiting the lost. Therefore, I can simply say the finite duration of his death was the equivalent of the eternal death awaiting the risen and subsequently executed lost. And I think there are other good answers, too.
The soul does not exist without the spirit or breath staying retained in the body. God formed the Dust and breathed in to it His life spirit, THEN Adam BECAME a living soul. Body + Breath/Spirit = a Living Soul.
It doesn't matter what the majority believed. Jesus explicitly rejected the belief that the wicked would be eternally tormented by saying they would be completely burned up in fire.
I agree with most of what Dr Fernandes says, but just still leaning towards Gehenna being total destruction. I believe in God and trust He is good. When we are with Him, we will know. This and evil are the toughest areas for me as a believer.
Immortality is only a gift that is given upon those who are found in Christ. Not to the unsaved! If you don't look into the doctrine of soul sleep you can't understand the written communication mortality, immortality, eternal life, 2nd death, paradise, sleep, eternal punishment, etc... Soul sleep is both hermeneutical and exegetical. It's consistent from cover to cover. Those who oppose this view must conjure up strange scriptural interpretation to fit their view. They must go through leaps and bounds to have come up with the conclusion and it's usually done by cherry picking new testament bible verses because they trying to validate their preconceived beliefs and reject all of the old testament teaching and then say, "we don't get into the old testament because it didn't have the full revelation". Actually no, they reject OT because their thought process doesn't allow them to put the pieces of the puzzle together. Only with soul sleep can you understand annihilation.
Michael Hurwitz Yes I would agree, but more importantly it's the judgmental Christians using that theology and slamming it on nonbelievers. Way to win over people to Christ is to love as Christ loved and to walk in the spirit and be lead by the Holy Spirit.
And the devil who had deceived them was hurled into the lake of fire and burning brimstone (sulfur), where the beast (Antichrist) and false prophet are also; and they will be tormented day and night, forever and ever.
It seems then the strongest passage for eternal torment is "they have no rest day or night". The first part of this verse from Revelation was shown to be the same as a finite event from the past. However, since it is apocalyptic imagery, a literal interpretation becomes suspect. I'm reminded of Psalm 95:11, which is quoted in Hebrews 4:5 saying, "They shall not enter my rest." Since this part of Revelation is imagery, a fair correlation can be made. The wicked therefore have no biblical "rest" day or night.
Satan, "Eat it Eve, YOU SHALL NOT SURELY DIE." [you will live in hell forever] traditional hell = believing the first lie of Satan himself, plainly shown in the word of God, from the very start.
Exactly. The "immortal soul" doctrine is false, and is not anywhere in the Bible. And it is perpetuating Satan's first lie...that you'll never die, even if you sin. The Bible is clear that sinners will die. Even if you claim that the place that sinners spend eternity in is horrible, that still means that they live forever, and that would mean that sin would always be in existence. But no, God is going to completely wipe out sin when Jesus returns!
@@CherryFrog321 Jesus has already taken wiped out the sins of those who put their faith and trust in the blood atonement of His blood sacrifice for the remission of their sins and reconciled them to God the Father. When a born-again believer dies their physical death in the earth, they are presented without sin to the Father-hence, Jesus has wiped out the sins of those who trust in His blood atonement for their sins to be wiped out.
I am so happy I have found this debate. I’m struggling to get back into the faith. I will say, the thought of an eternal torment doesn’t make me want to go to God. It makes me resent him because nobody asked to be born, and to threaten everyone with eternal burning is not love. You cannot hold a threat over someone’s head if they don’t choose you and call it love. That said, the idea that those who go to hell simply are set away into nonexistence sounds far more merciful and just to me. That makes me want to learn more and become closer. Why? Because it shows that God wouldn’t want to have his creations tormenting forever, he’d want to get a judgement over with and move on to be with his children. The ones in eternal torment are the original betrayers by way of satan and the fallen. The humans are destroyed. If that is the case, I find it easier to look at God in a loving way.
I am thankful for Jehovah’s Witnesses for exposing eternal torment as a lie. How unjust for God to torture people for eternity for sins committed over a relatively short lifespan. This speaker supporting conscious torment says he was saved because of his fear of hell. How much better to commit to Christ out of love and not fear of fire.
I discussed with a priest why God is merciful. As I expected, he danced around and did not address my points. Universalism is not consistent with scripture. Likewise, eternal punishment is in contradiction to a loving God. Traditional Christian denominational interpretations should not trump the use of logic when it comes to scripture.
Sorry Jim, I'm not sure what you mean when you say that the bible clearly teaches hell when even the most mainstream bibles are being forced to take the word out more and more. It's not even in the O.T. anymore. Jesus used the words Hades and Gehenna but he never taught about a hell of eternal torment. Paul never even mentioned the words at all, a huge thing to leave out considering his statement that it was given to him to preach the complete message. Most people when I ask them where our doctrine of hell is taught point to the book of revelations...yet it is certainly not taught here either. If a person were to try to use the lake of fire as a replacement for our traditional hell teaching (which there is no doubt it was inspired by these verses but it is CERTAINLY not taught here) this is very inconsistent because of the fact that "hades" (a word translated as hell in many bibles still) which is mentioned by Jesus often in verses of people trying to point to hell in the N.T. gets thrown into the lake of fire in revelation. Hell gets thrown into hell in the KJV! Kind of got themselves in a mess there with their over use of the word not being able to back out of absurdity in the end. Paul actually is preaching for the majority of his books, unlike the gospels which are more of a (very amazing and edifying) history message with amazing words of christ carried down to us. He clearly teaches about the salvation of all, how the gift was given to all men, how all men will be saved especially those who believe, how it is the will of god to save all men, how every knee will bow in the end and confess that Jesus is lord and how if you confess then you will be saved. It's an incredibly clear message and it is taught throughout the O.T. as well.... As was promised to Abraham "through your seed ALL THE NATIONS of the earth will be blessed" By the way, it doesn't help that the two most popular bibles (KJV and NIV) twist their translation according to this tradition of eternal torment. I'd like to paste something I wrote for a comment earlier on this point: For example the King James and NIV both manipulate the word judgement in John 5:29 as demonstrated below: 27 And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man. 28 “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and come out-those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned. 30 By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me. KJV says ... and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. So both NIV and KJV which are based on pretty different texts and are on two sides of the traditionalist perspective both imply through the language that the resurrection for the evil is into damnation. Which the dictionary says means "damned to hell" Pretty clear there huh? If I were a bible believer I guess it's case closed right? No.Thankfully the scripture was not written by King James and we have access to the greek text here. biblehub.com/interlinear/john/5-29.htm Such a clearly different message here in greek, The greek word used by jesus here "krisis" means judgement, and lest anyone think it's taken out of context judgement is actually a theme here in this part of John 5, the word is used in the previous verses several times and again in the following verse it's very clear the same meaning is intended. In fact in 5:27 Jesus says: And he has given him authority to "krisis" because he is the Son of Man. then 5:29 those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to "krisis". then the next verse 5:30 By myself I can do nothing; I "krisis" only as I hear, and my "krisis" is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me. So is Jesus here really teaching in the middle of talking about judgement that those will rise to be condemned? to damnation? No, clearly the point here is that they will rise to judgement "and my judgement is just" This isn't some twisted conspiracy, it's quite obvious and many bible translations agree including: New Living Translation "will rise to experience judgment." English Standard Version "resurrection of judgment." Berean Study Bible "the resurrection of judgment." Berean Literal Bible "resurrection of judgment." New American Standard Bible "to a resurrection of judgment." GOD'S WORD® Translation "those who have done evil will come back to life and will be judged." Holman Christian Standard Bible New Heart English Bible Aramaic Bible in Plain English This list will go on forever. I chose this case because it's an extreme example of the kind of blatant appeal that is made to tradition in 2 of the most widely used bibles in the world. I could demonstrate very many of these types of scriptures which have absolutely no basis for the english words being used. A serious study of the bible without any tradition reveals a book which preaches universal salvation in every single place, never contradicted and constantely confirmed. While any arguments for try to justify a dark age tradition of "hell" is based on taking a very few scriptures far out of context or reading in an entire belief into the use of a single greek word, such as Gehenna. I've heard intelligent men tell me "you know who talked about hell the most don't you? Jesus Christ!" Sounds pretty conclusive obviously I care about Jesus teachings more than anyone else in the bible as he is the WORD of God. However this is also incredibly misleading, Jesus uses words translated as "hell" in some bibles barely 12-13 times depending on translation and many of those are repeats from gospel to gospel. The reason he is the one who says it the most? Because Paul who is the majority of the entire new testament text doesn't talk about hell AT ALL, doesn't use the word a single time. If Jesus had said it at all he'd basically be the one who said it the most because it's not ever taught or mentioned that's what goes unsaid in this argument. And when Jesus does use one of the words translated as hell (neither of them actually mean hell in a word study and they are being removed from bible translations more and more) we are just supposed to read in our teachings about what hell means based on our tradition...because it's certainly not ever ever taught. Universal Salvation however isn't vaguely mentioned, but explicitly taught throughout the bible. Yet people are blind to the truth, they hold on to hell WITH A PASSION. What is with us?
Even though I don't agree with you I gave your post a thumbs up. I really appreciate the quotes from the church fathers about a long lasting punishment which I had not read before and I have read much looking for them. Those writings will take additional study for me, in some cases original greek writings were lost. I had read 2 Clem. but I seem to remember a lot of doubt about its authorship and date. A lot of things which only survived in latin have been known to be edited to suit future beliefs. This is proven with some writers like Origen who is constantly either loved or hated by the church depending on which piece of historical doctrine they are trying to prove (as he wrote so much!). He is very clear in the truth of the nature of Gods judgement, however in some writings which were translated to latin those things were removed or in some cases even overwritten to say something totally different! I don't know if you read my whole post or just marked me down as a non-everlasting believer and went from there with your post, but I don't believe in annihilation. If you read my previous post you should know what direction I am in. As far as the scripture itself is concerned, the use of the term "kolasis aionios" or "eternal punishment" which is so often taken as evidence not only from scripture but also from early greek speakers like Origen (I read a catholic book of quotes from church fathers by topic, it had "proof" origen believed in eternal punishment because it had a quote from him using the biblical phrase kolasis aionios.) is something that needs to be studied by all who consider themselves interested in this subject. If those words truly meant what they are translated to in english then the case is closed and the scripture seems quite clear that the wicked would be eternally punished(unless the truth is meant as a deeper mystery or something of the sort). However, after much reading I no longer believe that kolasis aionios mean's what the (mainstream) bibles translate it as. Some literal translations also reflect this. Aionios means age or age to come or of the ages, kolasis is chastisment. "The word for punishment is kolasis. The word was originally a gardening word, and its original meaning was pruning trees. In Greek there are two words for punishment, timoria and kolasis, and there is a quite definite distinction between them. Aristotle defines the difference; kolasis is for the sake of the one who suffers it; timoria is for the sake of the one who inflicts it. Plato says that no one punishes (kolazei) simply because he has done wrong - that would be to take unreasonable vengeance (timoreitai). We punish (kolazei) a wrong-doer in order that he may not do wrong again (Protagoras 323 E). Clement of Alexandria (Stromateis 4.24; 7.16) defines kolasis as pure discipline, and timoria as the return of evil for evil. Aulus Gellius says that kolasis is given that a man may be corrected; timoria is given that dignity and authority may be vindicated (The Attic Nights7.14). The difference is quite clear in Greek and it is always observed. Timoria is retributive punishment. Kolasis is always given to amend and to cure." From The Apostles' Creed by William Barclay. What a blessing to have such a rich library of facts with which to understand the tongue of our holy writings...not something I have learned someone can take for granted in this area. From youngs literal translation: Rev 14:11 and the smoke of their torment doth go up to ages of ages; and they have no rest day and night, who are bowing before the beast and his image, also if any doth receive the mark of his name. 20:10 and the Devil, who is leading them astray, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where [are] the beast and the false prophet, and they shall be tormented day and night to the ages of the ages. Mat 25:41 Then shall he say also to those on the left hand, Go ye from me, the cursed, to the fire, the age-during, that hath been prepared for the Devil and his messenger Mat 25:46 46 And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.' And unquenchable just means it will not be put out, until it burns out completely. The same word is used of the fires of Jerusalem and obviously it is no longer burning. Paul talks about the "end of the ages" as the final end time, this is something that would take a while to explain since I assume you're not familiar with the ages of correction and purification. There is so much which is different from traditional understanding in a more biblical view of the book of revelations that it would take a longer post than this one to explain it all, I wouldn't mind to write it but I'd want to feel like you'd actually read it first. We see the bible talking about "age to come" "ages to come" there are more ages to go, you even see in revelation 20:10 "day and night forever and ever" (your translation) but we know from the next few verses that there will be no more day or night once the kingdom has been established. I also have several quotes from early fathers who use the words "aionion" (your word for eternal) but then proceed to say something like "and then after that..." which makes no sense with current understanding. If you seem interested I would love to go deeper, let me know Jim I really enjoyed your post especially the fathers quotes I was not expecting that. That is why I like to have these discussions because it directs my learning in new areas and keeps my search alive and interesting :D
JC Pocket you've done a lot of investigation. One thing I've noticed about different Christian religions, you can go to any one and study their doctrine and have biblical proof of those translations of scripture to fit their arguments. In the end I ask myself if there is a God, would I worship One who holds a gun to my head and says: worship me or else I'll ensure you suffer forever it. The answer is no; atheism as the possibility of no God would be far more appealing.
+Fred Murphy i love you fred murphy, and i love that you are even spending time here. Your journey fills me with hope and joy for you. ever since i learned the truth of gods message which had been hidden for so long i have felt so free to be able to love my fellow human on this earth. i think hell doctrines cause us to automatically look down on people even if we dont mean to, how can you let yourself love all of the strangers in the world when you think they will burn justly with fire forever? there is a mental block that kept my love inside compared to the way it is now. fred you know what is beautiful? God is beautiful (sorry about my punctuation and grammar I'm on my phone laying down). how many people hear the message coming from so many churches as one of good news? you sure dont, but not only you youtube comments are full of people who cant stand Christians and their message, outright hate. its an ugly message, hey let me tell you about this guy and by the way if you dont believe what im telling you prepare for the worst torment for all of existence! its crazy to think the bible teaches this... we have been given a beautiful gift by god himself who loved us so much he gave his son because we could have never earned this gift our selves! the gift of life! a life that promises no more tears and no more sorrow a life that never ends. you have recieved this gift because of jesus sacrifice, he did this for you out of pure love expecting nothing in return. however, christ has also made a way for you to be made whole(saved in a manner of speaking but that word is overused by people who dont know what it means) TODAY right now you dont have to wait for the age to come, which is promised to us now. so the question naturally is how, right? well im sure youve been told this before by people who were telling you about getting tortured but the truth is right there so so close....love sets you free from sorrow even in this life, and if you can believe really believe what jesus did for you and what it means then you will begin to feel that spirit of love which is gods holy spirit filling into you. your whole world view will change and things become really beautiful, people become really beautiful, like you and this other nice man. when you can really believe this it really will complete a part of your soul which has been waiting this whole time....jesus said the kingdom was with in us our peace is RIGHT HERE and we just have to grab on to it and TRUST it. the greek word used when jesus is talking about believing, it also means trust. when people in the bible teach that to be made whole you have to believe its not a condition "you better believe as a payment for this grace!" its just an instruction to be better able to feel that which you already have been given! if you can only trust, believe, in other words of you really accepted this to be true it would make you whole and give you peace and joy in your life. its done it for me, and im far from perfect. also, it becomes wonderful to read good messages in the scripture again.
Thanks Jim for your reply! I'm sorry you felt I missed some of your points, I tried to get them all I will go back over it again in this reply :) I'll start from the beginning, you asked : "If there is no hell, why repent?" I'm going by scripture Jim, which is not to say that there is no judgement. I do feel however that this argument gets a little arbitrary at this point. A mainstream christian might ask the question "What's the point of Jesus at all if everyone gets saved!" or in your case "why repent if everyone gets saved!". The reason I call it arbitrary is because the same questions can be asked of any view and they are not easy to answer. A man could ask "why should I strive to be sin free if all I have to do is say a prayer and ask for forgiveness after" both of our beliefs (I'm assuming you're in the mainstream but some people have variations feel free to correct me) forgive people of their sins, after they have sinned. The difference is in your belief a person must ask for it, in mine Jesus asked for it. In both cases one could ask "why do good? if I can be forgiven". Now I will say the bible is clear that everyone will come to repentance, no wickedness will enter the kingdom of God. In both of our views you will repent to be granted access into Gods kingdom and be made pure. The difference is the time frame. The scripture does not teach that this repenting must happen before you die, in fact in many places demonstrates people being saved from the grave. NLT Rom 8:38 "And I am convinced that nothing can ever separate us from God's love. Neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither our fears for today nor our worries about tomorrow--not even the powers of hell can separate us from God's love." NIV Rom 14:9 "For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living." KJV 1 PET 3:19-20 "19By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 20Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water." NIV 1 PET 4:6 "For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to human standards in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit." That verse 1 PET 4:6 is teaching a very clear message which is lost in todays christian world view, there are so many scriptures which do not make sense anymore and have to be mauled and twisted in order to fit with todays unforgiving message. Here it clearly shows that you will be judged according to your fleshly acts however you will live according to God in the spirit. Our fleshly deeds are that wood hay and stubble which Paul preaches about, which we have built on our foundation of christ (who is the foundation of all things not just believers) which is to be burned away so that our spirits will be saved KJV 1cor 3:15 "If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire." There are many verses throughout the whole bible which show God uses fire for purification not for punishment, although sometimes being purified can hurt. Let me get a nice quote from antiquity here on this subject lest you try to warp these scriptures to fit our new watered down views... Origen (184/185 - 253/254CE) when teaching about this subject here is the full text however I'll summarize books.google.com/books?id=_WZKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA173&lpg=PA173&dq=origen+on+wood+hay+stubble&source=bl&ots=NIXig3WPDh&sig=FVU1wSG-dgDN5N7FrC1lXYRKTxA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiMkf6XvdXOAhUG3SYKHdHWAbwQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=origen%20on%20wood%20hay%20stubble&f=false "But when He is said to be a "consuming fire", we inquire what are the things which are appropriate to be consumed by God. And we assert that wickedness, and the works which result from it, and which, being figuratively called "wood, hay, stubble," God consumes as a fire." He then goes to call this person "the wicked man" often when I read this scripture to people they try to turn this among many other scriptures into a "believers only" event that is not true. He goes on to say "If any one can show that these words were differently understood by the writer, and can prove the wicked man literally builds up "wood, or hay, or stubble," it is evident that the fire must be understood to be material....but if on the contrary, the works of the wicked man are spoken of figuratively under the names "wood, or hay, or stubble," why does it not at once occur [to inquire[ in what sense the word "fire" is to be taken" Then he goes on to say "what what work can be spoken of in these words as being "burned," save all that results from wickedness? Therefore our God is a "consuming fire" in the sense in which we have taken the word; and thus he enters in as a "refiners fire," to refine the rational nature, which has been filled with the lead of wickedness....And in like manner, "rivers of fire" are said to be before God, who will thoroughly cleanse away the evil which is intermingled throughout the whole soul." These things happen, according to Paul, on judgement day. (have to split this reply in 2)
My question is why didn’t God warn Adam and Eve that their fate would be ECT? How come he simply said they would merely die when they ate the fruit? These are the first human beings, I think God would’ve saw it fit to warn them about ECT as opposed to just death. Especially since God commanded them to multiply and knew that their sin would inherently affect adam and eves posterity, who don’t even exist yet and essentially are helpless in how God would perceive them as a direct result of their parents behavior. ECT would be of paramount importance in a warning and it would have to be made as clear as one could make it to be a valid warning. You can’t just say “hey you’ll die” and then after the transgression be like “hey forgot to mention death means unending torment” like what?! Wish you would’ve made that clear.
Very interesting debate. Although I’m currently leaning toward universal reconciliation (NOT the same as universalism), I found Chris’s opening statement very compelling.
Jesus told us to "beware of the leaven of the Pharisees" - The Pharisees were obsessed with punishing, stoning, and crucifying people. That was there mojo. So eternal torment is a teaching the Pharisees would promote.
All I can say is that you really (REALLY!) need to read the Bible. I mean, we're only 3 chapters in and God is telling people they'll die if they eat a piece of fruit. Why not just swat their hands, right? And another 3 chapters further, and God is destroying the entire planet of all humans by drowning them. Rest assured, God is quite concerned about punishing evil. Every single prophet, apostle and even Jesus Himself spoke more about the judgement to come than any other topic. (I guess that's a long way of saying your approach to understanding Jesus' comments about the Pharisees is waaaay far off the mark.)
***** that's Calvinist garabge you're propagating. You have been lied to but you have hardened neck and you will not hear the Word of the Lord therefore you will eat the fruit of your own devices.
Madara that's for the unlearned. The Holy Ghost teaches us all things. Hell is everlasting punishment. Period. No where does God tell us to interpret the bible because the scripture is of no private interpretation. You know what's really lazy? Men who sit in their offices, writing books, and holding seminars "interpreting" the word of God instead of out knocking doors, going from house to house proclaiming the good news of the gospel. Men like N.T Wright, William Lane Craig, etc are hypocrites and they have all their worldly accolades like being a master of theology. What a bunch of crap.
"They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind..." Jeremiah 19:5 KJV Jeremiah 32:35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin. Leviticus 18:21 And you shall not let any of your seed pass through the fire to Molech, … 2 Kings 17:17 They sacrificed their sons and daughters in the fire. They practiced divination and sought omens and sold themselves to do evil in the eyes of the LORD, arousing his anger. these passages should settle it once and for all...God does not like the concept, the idea of, burning human beings alive in fire.So, obviously, that is not something that God will do. However. will all this overwhelming evidence convince most 'hellators' ?...not in my experience. They seem to want to hold onto the belief that God torments people forever.
good debate. Annihilationism is a fact. To explain why JWs and some cults see it the proper way but are wrong about other issues is simple - as they broke tradition of the many essential doctrine because of no commitment to the historical tradition (such as deity of Christ etc...) so it was easy for them to break tradition on a fact as well. The church was right about much of the majors but some of the minors are still being refined as we are still being "lead and guided into all truth" by the Holy Spirit.
I have to laugh at the people that want to discount annihilationism because the JW's and Seventh Day Adventists adhere to it as well. REALLY? You want to go down THAT road? OK, fine. ALLL the PAGAN religions adhere to eternal torment, from ancient Egypt to the Babylonians, the Greeks and the Romans. NOW, tell me which is worse, Paganism with all its sex orgies and ritualistic human sacrifices or 7th Day Adventism? You pretty much have to shun all logic and reason to hold onto such a satanic and sadistic doctrine as ECT, especially when the Bible clearly states from Genesis to Revelations the fate of the wicked is death, perish, consumed, destroyed, burned up, ashes, vanished, no more, etc.
*No one is going to be tortured or annihilated! All will be saved! Jesus Christ already took the judgment and punishment the world deserved!* Before going to the cross Jesus said... John 12 v31 *Now is the judgment of this world:* now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
Philippians 2 vs10-11 10so that *at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and ON EARTH and UNDER THE EARTH, 11and that every tongue will confess that JESUS CHRIST IS LORD,* to the glory of God the Father.
All that were made sinners by Adam will be made righteous by Jesus Christ! Romans 5 19For just as through the disobedience of the one man *THE MANY were made sinners,* so also through the obedience of the one man *THE MANY will be made righteous.*
Heresy. Not everyone will be saved. Why does it say that people will be cast into the lake of fire in Rev 20:15, 21:8? The atonement of Jesus Christ makes salvation possible, but not automatic. Salvation is conditional upon repentant faith in Christ - John 3:16-18. People are still spiritually dead unless they accept Jesus Christ as their Savior. That's why one must be born again & have their sins washed away (John 3:3-8, Rom 5:9, Eph 1:7) There's a broad way that leads to destruction and many are on that path and narrow is the way leading to life, which only a few find (Matt 7:13-14). Jesus is the only way to heaven (John 14:6, John 10:9, Acts 4:12), There's Judgment Day of punishment for the wicked (Matt 25:46, 1 Cor 6:9-11, 2 Thess 1:8-9, Rev 21:8) You're teaching Universalism and denying what the Bible says. Everyone can be saved but not all will be saved. It's a person's choice. God bess.
Godwin Adjei *Fire in the Bible is usually symbolic not literal fire!* Proverbs 25 21If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink: 22For thou shalt *heap coals of fire upon his head,* and the LORD shall reward thee. *Not literal Fire!* *Believers works are tried by fire but not literal fire!* 1 Corinthians 3 15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: *but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.* *God is Love but God is also a Consuming Fire but likely not a literal fire!* 1 John 4 16And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. *God is love;* and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. Hebrews 12 *29For our God is a consuming fire.* *Since God is love and a consuming fire then God's lake of fire could be symbolic for a lake of God's consuming love!* *This makes sense if being loving to your enemy, giving them food and water is symbolically heaping coals of fire on their head, right?* Proverbs 25 21If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink: 22For thou shalt *heap coals of fire upon his head,* and the LORD shall reward thee.
These verses you brought up have totally different context: - 1 Cor 3:1-15 talks against Apollos/Paul division, about trial of works, loss of rewards, based on their quality. - 1 John 4 is true. God is love but he's also holy and just. Love doesn't negate justice. We're always commanded to love Matt 22:36-40, Jn 13:34-35 - God is a consuming fire, no wonder the sons of Aron got consumed by God inside the tabernacle for offering profane/strange incense fire in Leviticus 10. That's just his attribute. It also says same thing in Rom 12, when we're commanded to overcome evil with good, cos God says "vengeance is mine". The Bible says consistently hell is place of eternal punishment: - Furnace of Fire, where there's Weeping & gnashing of teeth - Matt 13:42 (What's symbolic about that?) - In the lake of fire: God's wrath full strength, fire & brimstone, no rest day/night, smoke of torment rises forever & ever - Rev 14:9-11. It doesn't symbolize God's "consuming love" at all. Nowhere does it say that. In Genesis 19 God destroyed Sodom & Gomorrah with fire & brimstone - is that symbolic?
Yeah he thinks the soul and spirit are the same thing. Humans are spiritually dead while they are alive on earth with body and soul. Its only if someone is born-again that someone is spiritually alive. Hell is the place where the spiritually dead go to experience the death of their body for the first time, and the death of their soul.
I don't understand what Chris meant about the atonement being completed on the cross. Wasn't the atonement complete when the high priest came out of the most Holy place to show that the sacrifice was accepted? This seems to be what Hebrews 9:28 indicates.
I would love to hear Chris give a teaching on the subject outside of the debate. I want to hear at a slower pace so I can absorb all you have to share through the word. Thankful for all your study to bring light to this subject. numbers 6:24-26:)).
I truly believe that if God were to infallibly communicate to all the world that the conscious torments of hell were not eternal, MANY Christians would not be in church next Sunday. Believers in ECT (which I lean toward) need to take seriously this question, do you long for heaven? Or do you desire ardently to escape hell? Upon reading that, most people's minds gave the Sunday school answer. Really tho, ponder it. You can lie even to yourself, but you cannot lie to God. What's frightful about hell to you: is it being away from the Lord? Does the thought of that make you sad?
It's not blinding me at all. I'm completely open to dualism being true and I already genuinely believe that a real ontological & spiritual change that occurs in regeneration.
Notice too that the development of the specialized use of the word "Gehenna" didn't occur in the OT, but during the intertestamental period with all their connotations.
Jeremiah 12:3 But thou, O Lord, knowest me: thou hast seen me, and tried mine heart toward thee: pull them out like sheep for the slaughter, and _prepare them for the day of slaughter._
Here are a couple of honest questions perhaps someone can answer. If annihilation is true. At some point during the conscience suffering all sin is paid for and now you are annihilated. If your sins are now paid for wouldn't those that hold to universalism be valid that now you are worthy of heaven instead of annihilation? Here is also an honest question in which I don't know the answer. If during life you hated God and lived a life of defiance and rebellion as Romans reveals, at death or the resurrection do you still have a defiance and hatred towards God? In other words wouldn't you still maintain a hatred for God and continue sinning? If so wouldn't you continue to be punished never really paying for your sins? Thanks for your input.
I've never said that "only the physical death of Christ was necessary for the atonement." I explicitly said in my opening statement that the punishment Jesus bore as our substitute in our place was "suffering and death." CI easily answers the question "Why the God-man?" 1) Because only the death of the God-man can serve as the substitutionary atoning death for all mankind. 2) Because only the God-man could rise from death and live forever to intercede for his people.
You see, you are responding to a misconception of annihilationism in which the wicked fully pay the penalty for their sin and *then* are annihilated, but that's not our view. Our view is that "the wages of sin is death." Though inflicted by painful means (as was the Lord's substitutionary death), it is the deprivation of life, not ongoing conscious suffering, with which the wicked are punished in hell.
Phil's opening was an appeal to authority, teadition and ad hoc; exegesis(he doesn't even treat the extra-biblical texts he uses correctly) Does the rest of his debate time..go this bad Guess his first rebuttal(if you can call it that answers that question..
Finally!!!... a debate that is conducted with kindness and respect, without arrogance, and without insulting each other! Both of these gentlemen exhibited very Christ-like attitudes!
A Christian debate shouldn't be about "winning", but we should always keep an open discussion, which encourages a deeper understanding!
09 GVSU
Well said! 👍
Its unfortunate how rare these kind of debates are.
Christ like attitude love.....then later you’re going to hell because you used your brain to come to a conclusion that the stories in the bible don’t lign up with reality and reject what was written in a book collected by men
Debates should be about truth presented in the best light and in the best manner. ..and since truth always wins, yes, debates should be about winning.
Truth-speakers need not insult and demean in the process of putting out solid truth. But if they did, they'd be in good company with prophets, apostles and even Christ Himself. (just sayin'...)
09 GVSU I thought the same. This was an excellent debate!
This debate is beautiful. The way you two behaved is such an amazing witness for Christ! I pray I can behave more like this in the future.
Well done Chris! A brilliant strategy and the best focus of biblical scholarship for the revealing of the truth.
I'll give Phil this much. He at least seemed more gracious toward Chris in debating with him than most traditionalists are when they argue with a conditionalist.
There was another debate I once witnessed in which the eternal torment proponent actually told the conditionalist that he was going to enjoy watching him burn. It was sick.
Phil is at least not going off with accusations of Bible rejecting or heresy or something on Chris here. He even admits at about 1:42:00 that he believes Chris is trying to make a solid Biblically-based argument. You won't hear a lot of traditionalists be so accommodating.
I really like Phil even though I side with Chris on this one! :)
+Trevor Martin I totally agree. It seems like to be empathetic, compassionate, or objective is considered heresy nowadays. I'm with you, I'm going to attempt to love everyone whether they accept my perspectives or not.
+SarahsKnight0 Yes, and I see that in a lot of comments on these videos too. "Traditionalists" often get angry and hurl insults and accusations at conditionalists which certainly isn't Christ-like behavior! But at least this man was respectful.
CherryFrog321 Yeah, it's insane. I just recently had a friend straight up tell me that I reject Christ on account of not believing the traditional view of hell. ... Even after she questioned why I believe in conditional immortality and I gave her perfectly rational, Scriptural reasons for it. Afterward it was obvious she didn't hear a word I said, and just insisted that eternal torment is true because Christ "talked about hell more than anything else" (when He actually really didn't), and so if I reject part of Christ's teachings, then I reject all of Him. I just said I would not tolerate being called a false believer for such a petty reason, and pulled out of the conversation. ... but at least with Phil, he and Chris appear to be friends and he respects Chris' position even though he disagrees with it.
Wow that's terrible! I hear that all the time too though. I often get, "are you calling Jesus a liar?" No, of course we don't think he was lying...we just think that the traditionlist view is misinterpreting what he said concering the fate of the lost.
Hell of a debate Chris
. 🔥
lol. Nice
No you didn't!
This debate helped reinforce my view of annihilation. Thanks Chris!
Conditional immortality and annihilation for the win.
Phil says we should believe something not based on emotion yet he admitted his major motivation for following jesus was FEAR of hell?! Wow...
As Chris said, it is also one of the main reasons of rejection of our faith.
Brilliantly put ;)
The beginning of wisdom is fear, the Bible says. If I had no fear at all when at Niagara falls, my life would be endangered.
@@LilacDaisy2 dude... the word "fear" in the bible means utter and total respect. Look it up. Like the wife must fear her husband.
You keep your wife in fear?? Cuz tjats some messed up exegesis.
Disgusting. God doesnt want people following Him out of fear. That is such preversion of Gods character. He wants people to follow Him because they value His ways and righteousness! Not out of fear!
If one acknowledges everything summarized by Chris Date in his final comments, and I mean actually study it thoroughly, you will believe God and His word, if you are honest. The lost will be annihilated. END OF STORY. Now let's exercise the Spirit and win some souls to Christ!
Exactly brother!
Agreed !!!!
So, when revelation 14 says they have no rest day nor night, they cease to exist, and find rest? No, that is not what it says, ut says they have no rest day nor night, ut says nothing about them being annihilated.
Revelation 14:11
King James Version
11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
Chris great job. You have helped me come to the truth and I finally feel free in my faith and excited about heaven and telling others.
The guy that stands up at 2:09:35 was DRAMATICALLY shaking his head several times when Chris was speaking, and then stands up and essentially says that Chris has the wrong spirit about him.
REALLY???!!! How about not dramatically shaking your head for the rest of the audience to see that you don't approve?!!! (disrespectful)... sorry, he just came off as "one of those guys"!
the church have taught for 2000 years the false traditional doctrine of eternal punishment, what did yeshua say 8'THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME. 9'BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.'" Mark 7:7
Their worship of me is useless, because they teach man-made rules as if they were doctrines.'
Not necessarily true, the early church was mostly not teaching eternal punishment.
Amen Jeff
Most people also believed the earth was flat for thousands of years... we only know what we can observe, in the case of the bible we were left a testament, God provided it would be enough of a testimony, along with the world being a testimony to his existance. If we look at the world and the Bible, it seems that the wages of sin, is death. And that death is exactlg that unless we believe in Jesus and take part in the ressurection. Think about it, wed be experiencing souls of our loves ones all the time if they were sitting by God LITERALLY - WHAT BETTER TESTIMONY than your dead grandma coming to tell u about heaven? But its likely the case that the soul sleeps or goes to rest in God before the time of judgment. Our breath of life psyche comes from God, so does our Pneuma -spirit - and our body is " moulded clay" and to dust it will return
I rejected Christ for 20 years and eternal conscious torment was a HUGE reason why.
I used to say ask " How can I be happy in heaven if others don't make it and are tortured for eternity. I also wondered where Christians heart are that defend traditional hell.
Thank God I found Edward Fudge lecture
This is a HUGE consideration when assessing the eternal torment doctrine. It is so outrageous, it makes so little sense, that many would be driven away from salvation by its unreasonable character. Those who push this poison character assassination of God will one day face the reality that they murdered people with their lies. Sad.
@Sir_Valion I agree. I was overjoyed when I fell on Edward Fudges lecture, then binged watched Chris Date.
What angers me is fellow Christians that defend the doctrine like it's their child and go as far as to say you're a heretic for believing Conditional immortality. They bend scripture with mental gymnastics to the point that death mean living forever.
@Sir_Valion I did a LIVESTREAM on Conditional Immortality awhile back
ruclips.net/video/S7KSBOj2Xik/видео.html
@@JasonJohnSwartz ET mongers are liars, plain and simple. God seeks lovers of truth.
You rejected Christ because of the punishment that sinners face? And if they face it for all eternity what of it? Is God not allowed to Judge accordingly too how He pleases? Is He not both creator and Good, while we are creation and fallen that needed Him to redeem us? We couldn't even redeem ourselves, yet so many want to demand that God has no right to do what He very well can justly do.
Thanks be to God He sent His only begotten Son Jesus to redeem us so that we who are saved do not have to save what we deserve.
Wow, I've been on the fence for a while, but Chris nailed it here. I now definitely believe in conditional immortality.
And "soul sleep?"
Yes, the evidence for that is overwhelming.
Same!!! Not sure about would sleep. But definitely Chris’s view is correct.
Thanks for the video! And I agree telling people they're going to burn forever takes away from the meaning of the free gift of life.
Not too mention making God out to be a completely sadistic psychopath. To accuse Him of such character should require absolute undeniable proof.
This satanic lie has done more to blaspheme His name and character than anything anyone has ever done.
It's prevented untold millions from accepting Him and has done great harm to the psyche of those who do believe in it.
A brilliant discussion. You both conversed really well and respectfully. Thanks so much 🙏.
chris won this debate hands down by quoting the bible, phil's whole argument was "the word death, perish, and destroy dont really mean death, perish, or destroy but mean seperation from gog". BALONY, if these words dont REALLY mean what they say then maybe "forgiveness, salvation, eternal life" , etc DONT really mean what they say either? if so then the entire bible doesnt really mean what it says.
If God didn't mean what he said then why didn't he just say what he meant? At least Allah is obvious he's just going to torture the damned....
+jamesb7777a Your view of language and how it works is incredible naive and misinformed. Any exegete worth their salt will tell you that. Obviously, you have no language training whatsoever. The Greek word apollumi conveys injury, destruction, or final end of earthly existence. Your comments display a general lack of education in this area. Hate to be so blunt but you were so kind to Phil I thought you would appreciate a similar style.
+Ed Dingess I have studied the origional languages, and actually apollumi, in its first and most often used meaning - means destroy, death. (By far widespread in the bible and in historical writings).
Stan S It does not matter what it means in most uses. It matters how it is used in those instances that concern the subject about which we speak.
Hey James, Matthew 25:46 talks about eternal punishMENT, not eternal punishING
You performed admirably on that debate, Chris. It was very revealing to have heard Dr. Fernandez recognizing that it is unbiblical to hold that the lost will live eternally.
The best solution he could come up with was by equivocating between the meaning of life and existence.
Yes. That was a telling moment in this debate. The attempt at distinction happened at 52:30 through about 55:30
I feel like crying while listening to this man defending eternal punishment.
He said that it was fear of hell that made him to believe in Christ. 😭 That broke my heart!
Imagine Jesus listening to this after the sacrifice of love He did for us, what motivated this man was actually fear of condemnation and not His unconditional love and unspeakable gift grace!
I pray that people will turn from this wrong notion of hell and seek the only true love in Christ Jesus, our Redeemer.
I’m devastated!
May God use me to help Brazilians (my fellow people) to rethink hell and seek Jesus for His incomparable goodness and beyond explanation peace.
Let us be ministers of reconciliation not threatening.
But don’t you think it’s both? Shouldn’t the lost be afraid of hell? I think it’s everything, fear of hell and appreciation for what Christ did for us. Without that fear we wouldn’t appreciate his sacrifice! It’s like someone saving your life from drowning and telling them “ I was never afraid of draining!”
So, did these people find rest, and cease to exist, or do they have no rest day nor night? Only one is true, and the other one is a false teaching.
Revelation 14:11
King James Version
11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
Wasn't it always about death, since the original sin? "but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die."
Jean C Alicea h
Yeah, and you would think that if eternal torment were really the penalty for sin, God would have warned Adam and Eve about that. But he only told them that they would die and "turn to dust." He certainly didn't tell them that they'd go to a horrible place and exist there eternally.
@@CherryFrog321 Definitely!
@@CherryFrog321 He didn't say they wouldn't. Not until the NT in which Jesus revealed it.
@@CherryFrog321
Just because it wasn't revealed to them, doesn't meN it isn't true. There are a lot of things in the Bible, that have been revealed thousands of years later. Like the law, it wasn't revealed to Adam and Eve either, but that doesn't mean it wasn't revealed later.
CS Lewis and his Anglican denomination of 72 million, believes in Annihilation. Billions of years of torture seems excessive. "An eye for an eye" and "39 lashes" was the Old Covenant's limit to punishment other than stoning.
I'm not sure if Anglicans do in majority. I have seen no support for this. I know some do.
Where's your source that C. S. Lewis believed in Annihilationism?
There are no "years" in eternity.
72=kaballah, esoteric occult stuff and cs Lewis was a wolf
The death of Jesus seems a little excessive too, what's your point?
Really lovely to listen to a rational,respectful debate between two brothers who hold diametrically opposing views, but still remain loving and caring of each other.
I'm ok now,but quite recently i was close to walking away from Christianity because of the disunity between fellow Christians.
Telling each other they were going to hell,calling each other heretics etc simply because they interpreted certain scriptures differently.
I've seen it here in the comment section. It is absolutely unacceptable.
I beseech you my brothers and sisters,take this debate as an example of how we should reason with each other.
God bless you all.
Viewpoints aside, Chris is a much better speaker and debater. Phil's arguments were full of fallacies. Appeal to tradition, appeal to authority, post hoc &c.
A bit Ad hominem I'd say too:) this was a great debate.
Keaton Smi
Each man believes the Bible is the sole and ultimate authority, the final arbiter of revealed truth; and each man becomes, in effect, his own final authority by deciding what it says. As God's definitive revelation, Scripture happens to be chalk-full of subtlety and complexity, at least to the appearance of our limited human intelligence. The Scripture is the sole source of (the content of) revealed truth -- and it is intelligible, otherwise God wouldn't have revealed it to us. This is not an intractable puzzle: the Bible is infallibly true and intelligible, but even to reasonable, learned, faith-filled men it can seem to teach very different things, even on important issues like what happens after we die.
Thanks be to God that He gave us also a Church as a supreme custodian of the Word of God -- indeed this Church gave us the Bible -- "And the gates of Hell will not prevail against it." In no place within the Bible does it say that the Bible is the ONLY authority. On the contrary, "hold fast to whatever is handed down, either by spoken word or by letter."
Without twisting the words of Scripture and the will of God in the era of the final covenant, you cannot ignore that Jesus in the Bible inaugurates and confers a real authority. This is sometimes called the institutional church. It's not surprising that he entrusts the word of God to an organized community. Yes, take it on Scripture. Take it also as the Holy Spirit confirms for you the beautiful coherence and integrity of the truth which shines like a light. This does no prejudice to Scripture -- on the contrary, it preserves its truth and witness in its fullness, as God intended.
Finally, I'll give a quick summary of what the Church teaches on this question. The Church takes the "Tradionalist" view. There a number of bible verses which, standing alone, support in a clear way both positions. For example, if we just had a verse or two on weeping and gnashing of teeth, or eternal fire (or eternal fill-in-the-blank), it would be clear evidence for eternal conscious torment. Or, on the other hand, if we just had Matthew 10:28 saying "... can destroy both body and soul in hell", it would be clear evidence for annihilationism. But we have both, and much more. So what to do? How to settle this question and still be fully accountable to Scripture as the source of revealed truth? If you take the 5-10 passages just from Matthew, most of which come from the lips of our Savior, they indicate with various descriptions and imagery the eternal and the conscious (and unpleasant) dimension of the afterlife for the unsaved. These passages, and all others that hail from the Gospel, must be given a special weight for (mostly) obvious reasons. Now what about the passages Chris pointed to? These must be read in light of what Christ says in the Gospel (and vice versa). A quick look at Matthew 10:28 reveals that it is directed at believers in connection with preaching the Gospel fearlessly -- "proclaim from the rooftops", "do not fear those who can only destroy the body," etc. A few lines later Jesus reminds them about the sparrow, how even this trivial bird is under the watchful providence of God. So Jesus is illustrating the power of God, God's providence, and exhorting awe and fear of the Lord and, finally, trust. There is a note of admonition, as if to confirm the testimony that comes to us from Paul, "Woe to me if I do not preach the Gospel!" The Holy Spirit inspires us and speaks in our hearts, not only for our own salvation but for the salvation of others, and woe to us if we do not preach this Gospel of Christ. So even if the line about God's ability to destroy both body and soul is a line confirming fear of the Lord; and if in fact it signifies annihilation, which seems clear; still the question is, "to what end"? Is Jesus defining or characterizing hell? Is he even emphasizing hell in any way whatsoever? Does he even say that this is what DOES or WILL happen in hell? Not at all. Even the literal sense is that God CAN destroy both body and soul, something human persecuters cannot accomplish, clearly emphasizing God's power. Again, standing alone it might be a different story, but it must be read in light of other passages which by comparison teach an almost crystal clear view of hell as eternal privation of God who is the source of all that is good.
The same sort of exegesis applies to the other passages indicating annihilation; and, as Phil points out, the Greek words translated as "destruction" really do indicate in many cases something other than extinction or annihilation -- ruin, misery, catastrophe, rubble, to lay waste, etc., all of which perfectly describes the eternal separation from God characterized by conscious torment.
Chris's argument about immortality is resolved by understanding life as a quality, or at least seeing the different senses in which the word is sometimes used. His argument from Atonement employs an exaggerated view of the penal substitutionary concept, and also ignores the fact that Jesus's greatest suffering on the Cross really was spiritual from separation from the Father.
Pointing out fallacies does not constitute an ad hominem attack. It rightly exposes the unsoundness of an argument. Besides, ad hominem would be calling into question Phil's arguments because of who he is as a person.
Keaton Smith Matthew 27:53 ►
Verse (Click for Chapter)
New International Version
They came out of the tombs after Jesus' resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
If God is everywhere, and Hell is where God tortures people forever.
How is hell the absence of God.
God would have to be there eternally too?
And if hell is the absence of God's love, but yet God is Love?
The only way to be truly separated from God forever is annihilationism.
How could you be genuinely happy and full of love with both man and God in heaven if you knew that this same God was keeping many of your loved ones, family and friends supernaturally alive for the sole purpose of them to eternally experience unimaginable pain, unbearable torture in darkness with lonely abandonment WITH NO POSSIBLE END to their torment??
That sort of sadism makes Hitler look like Mother Teresa and certainly doesn’t sound like the loving Jesus I know or the joy filled heaven He has awaiting us.
The argument saying that if this doctrine on hell is wrong it could lead to other doctrines coming under attack shows that Phil comes from a position of fear and feels uncomfortable if his orderly house of tradition would fall apart. It is way easier and more comfortable to stick with an established tradition than to face reality that might point to weak points in it. It’s like the Titanic that could never sink and putting one’s trust in the accomplishments of mankind instead of God. Our traditions are not worth the paper they might be printed on, all those Catholic ideas we adopted from the Roman Catholic Church, unless they can be proven over and over again. Many traditions remained in the church not because they are true but because over nearly two thousand years most people didn’t have the means to investigate them more thoroughly. These traditions have become so ingrained in our culture that we often blindly accept them as established truth because it just seems so common sense to us. We should take a warning from the Pharisees at the time of Jesus who were in the same dilemma. They had so many traditions they didn’t challenge anymore because they were deeply ingrained in their thinking that they failed to recognise their messiah when he stood right in front of them.
Just because the historical christian church has largely believed in eternal conscious torment; that doesn't make it true Phil. The population don't determine true.
It's founded on eternal soul, which isn't biblical in my studies. When Adam fell, he returns to the dust, as dust. Only those who believe have life in them, and will be raised up at the last day.
Yeah especially when you find out that the idea of eternal torment didn't come uo until the 5th century by st augustine who used eternal hell as a way to get people to support the catholic church
@@HerveyShmervy - what a stupid thing to say. Daniel, Isaiah, Revelation and Matthew explicitly reference a fiery torment for God's enemies. Augustine came 300+ years after the latest Bible author.
timffoster did you ignore the video you watched?
Yeah his argument is an appeal to authority fallacy and/or argumentum ad populum it's not a logical argument as the majority has been and can be wrong.
You can also call this group think which a lot of Christians tend to do and claim it's the Holy spirit talking to them when really it's something they just all agreed upon especially when they're ignorant of what the Bible actually teaches. If you have no good argument to refute their claim likely you'll just agree with what's said.
In a sense, "cessation of life" is what's thrown into the lake. Remember, this is symbolic imagery; death and Hades are the fourth horseman of the apocalypse from chapter 6, and it gives up its dead in 20 and then is thrown into the lake of fire, where we have to assume it, too, is tormented for eternity if we're going to assume everything else thrown into it is. But it symbolizes the end of the cessation of life, after the wicked have died the second death.
I think Dr. Fernandes and Chris Date were both admirably gracious in this debate! Thankful for you both!
As I see it, the biblical case for conditional immortality is overwhelming, and so I don't fault Phil as a debater for having lost the debate. While I think the annihilationist case here came out clearly on top, I think both men did a great job representing their respective views. Good job, brothers! It's important that we have this debate with both charity and sharp clarity.
Thanks, Nathaniel! We do strive to model those things, and are very grateful to Dr. Fernandes for his irenic spirit.
The spirit behind Chris' message is this: we should LOVE Christ because he died for us, gave us a moral code, and is here for us day in and day out. We should love him because he loved us, not because were terrified of the alternative: hell.
Yes, we should do that, but that does change the fact that being tormented in hell for all eternity isn't real.
I have watched this entire video, and thoroughly enjoyed it. Thank you! :) It is wonderful to see two spirit-filled brothers having a godly and respectful debate. I admire them both! God bless them.
I felt Mr Date presented an excellent case for annihilationism, though here are six of my own additional arguments, which I don't think Mr Date touched upon:
*1. Incomplete atonement?*
If the punishment for sin really is eternal torment, Jesus MUST be tortured forever, otherwise my atonement would be incomplete and void.
*2. No mention of Satan's death in Scripture*
Believers in eternal torment think that Satan's fate is "death and destruction" just like humans. Yet the Bible never once mentions anything about Satan dying, or angels perishing, or demons being destroyed. Is that just some HUGE coincidence? Or in fact do humans have a completely different fate to fallen angels, hence different langauge describing their fate.
*3. The unholy trinity are not human*
I do believe that Revelation speaks about eternal torment-but only for three individuals: Satan, the Antichrist and the false prophet (Rev 20:10). Since this unholy trinity will not be killed by the Lake of Fire, we can assume they are all angelic/immortal beings. Another clue is Rev 11:7 which says the Antichrist will originate from the Abyss-the Abyss is the prison for demons (Rev 20:1-2).
*4. Fire kills people!*
How exactly could someone be thrown into a lake of fire and survive it? That just doesn't make any sense. The only instance of humans surviving such a fate was in Daniel, but those men were under God's protection-unlike those in the Lake of Fire!
*5. Equal punishment for all?*
If every sinner received eternal torment then that would mean all sinners received EQUAL punishment! This stands in direct contrast with everything the scriptures say about God repaying each man according to what he has done.
*6. Deceptive Jesus?*
If eternal torment were true, it would be a HUGE DEAL and people would REALLY need to know about it! So wasn't it cruel and deceptive of Jesus to never mention it while He was on earth? He went around warning people about death, destruction and fire-clearly implying execution. If the truth were so much worse, why would He choose to only reveal it amidst all the symbolic language of Revelation, a book not even given to the saints until nearly a century after His death?
*SAINTS IN HEAVEN?*
As for people going to Heaven, I do not believe humans go to Heaven, which is why the Bible makes such a big deal about the Lord Jesus ascending to Heaven, since He is the only man to have ever done this and it is not normal (John 3:13).
The rest of us will not see the Heavenly city of Jerusalem until after the judgement. Revelation 21:2 says that the city will come down prepared "like a bride for her husband". Clearly this will be the first time we've seen this city. If we had already been living there for thousands of years, this "bridal" description would not fit.
Jesus said to the theif on the cross: "Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise". But it is only translators who place the comma there. It could be written: "Verily I say unto thee today: Thou shalt be with me in paradise
Well, this is all just my humble opinion. These are surely not critical issues pertaining to salvation. I preach 7 steps of salvation:
1. Fear God, who is holy and righteous, and has appointed a day when He will judge all sinners
2. Repent and humble yourself
3. Call upon God's mercy, through Jesus Christ, who died to save sinners like you
4. Show that you are truly sorry, turning from all your evil ways
5. Be baptised into Jesus in water
6. Pray to receive the Holy Spirit, who will turn your life around and remake you into a new person
7. Remain faithful to Jesus, knowing that those who continue in obedient faith will inherit eternal Life
Read in Ezekiel what God does to Satan. And how about Revelation 20-21. 21 starts with no more sin etc. 20 ends with the last enemy, death and the grave being destroyed in the lake of fire.
+Lee Bee "Church of Christ" WORK out your own Salvation. Phil 2:12 NOW read verse 13. = Grace. Very Odd reasoning for a member of the "Church of Christ' Made a few good points. "Church of Christ' ?
+howsziz I don't know why you keep saying "Church of Christ"?
Ezekiel 28:12-19
Fire and then "no more forever" also can be interpreted as no more until the ages of age. We know that the age of the earth comes to end. So when the bible used term like "aionios" it means age during. When that word is applied to God, we know he by DEFAULT exist with immortality so we take it in the literal sense that his age is endless.
When the word aionios-translated in english as forever, we know that man is not immortal along with the planet earth so the age of his existence ends at the destruction of his soul along with the destruction of earth at the same event in Rev 20-9-10, psalms 37:20, Malachi 4:1-3.
So when the word applied to the saved, why then do we mean it to be unending? Because Pauls message is based upon looking to receive this gift of immortality because of the incorruptible, glorified body we will receive during the resurrection and translation. 1Cor. Ch 15, 1 thess 4:17. Romans 2:7
With Christ there's life 1 John 5:12. No christ-no life
Interesting points
The spirit can never be exterminated, Luke 16:19-31; Mar 9:48 ‘where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’
This is the same language Isaiah uses to describe dead corpses.
Isaiah 66:24
“And they shall go forth and look
Upon the corpses of the men
Who have transgressed against Me.
For their worm does not die,
And their fire is not quenched.
They shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.”
@@ABC123jdCorrect, we are warned, Old and New Testaments about the eternal fire awaiting the lost: Isa 33:14, Everlasting burnings.
this is the problem I see alot of traditionalist ask well if you stop existing what's the big deal? to me it sounds like people should not really care about eternal life but only if they are threatened with eternal torture. it like they don't want to exist forever unless the oposite is eternal torture. Even if there is no eternal torture we should be extremely happy that we can get to exist in bliss without end. it's the ultimate freedom of will that God gave us. Before we existed he could not ask us do you want to exist forever? But after he created us he gives us this choice to exist and if we never wanted to exist in first place our free will is not taken away cuz we won't exist.
You are a fucking nut!
It takes one to know one.
***** LOVE YOU!!!
Mary worship has been accepted by the church for 1500 years, but Phil does not conclude that that doctrine should be accepted! While he finds it impossible to believe that the church could be wrong about ECT for the very same period!!!
Chris makes a better argument. Another note: his voice sounds like a rapidly bouncing ball.
lool
yeah and Fernandes sounds like chalk scratching a board lol
@@romanempressolivia1815 He sounds just like Columbo (even the accent). Example -- skip to 1:58 ruclips.net/video/D84ul-OHuqw/видео.html
@@LilacDaisy2 Can't unhear! That's hilarious m
Dr Phil didnt' have a leg to stand on....WELL done Chris!
I had immense respect for Dr. Phil before this debate. I still do, but i lost respect considerably after this debate.
Again, I explicitly said in my opening that suffering is part of the punishment. Looks like you may not have been listening very closely, or your bias is distorting what you hear.
I explain degrees of punishment in my first and second rebuttal. Degrees of punishment is more consistent in conditionalism.
Chris Date
Hello brother Chris,So This Debate is You Believe that Hell Exist ?
And Phill believes Hell Does Not Exist ?
God bless you and your family abundantly in Christ Jesus.
Chris Date
Hello brother Chris,So This Debate is You Believe that Hell Exist ?
And Phill believes Hell Does Not Exist ?
God bless you and your family abundantly in Christ Jesus.
The “Community Rule” found with the Dead Sea Scrolls says that those who walk in the way of the spirit of truth will receive everlasting life, but those who walk in the way of the spirit of deceit will face the “disgrace of annihilation...suffering and bitter misery in dark abysses until they have been destroyed.” (Werner G. Werner, The Manual of Discipline (BRILL, 1957), 26.)
Whoa for real
Dead Sea Scrolls aren't real, lol
I didn't watch the entire debate, but I, like most have been raised with the traditionalist view of eternal torment. Lately I have have been seeing things in scripture that have made me wrestle with this notion. The obvious one that is sticking out to me right now is in Genesis 3 “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever-” I'm not sure when the idea came in that we are all eternal? It says plainly right there that we won't live forever. Thinking in light of this verse it makes what Jesus did more glorious to me by giving us eternal life who believe in Him. Am I missing something here? Did God somewhere along the way give sinners eternal life to torture them endlessly?
Trevor Alexander Ik right, I mean just please kill them god. What purpose do they serve in your universe other that to scream in pain. Imagine us creating an ai robot who was capable of having an experience and then programing him to feel pain, for doing something wrong that we programmed him To do.
I left ECT about a month and a half ago realizing we've inserted the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment.We must be honest with ourselves that Jesus...our King and Savior did a lousy job CLEARLY communicating mankind was already on there way to hell because of Adam and without it him it will stay that way and we will burn in hell forever...its never communicated once.
Christ took the death penalty and had victory over death and the grave.Death is what Adam and Eve were cursed with...not eternal conscious torment...Jesus put a stop to it by defeating it...tasting death for all mankind
If the wages for sin is eternal torture in hell....Penal Substitutionary Atonement is logically impossibe
I believe the Bible is clear that the living God is the Savior of All Mankind...especially those who believe
That by Adam ALL die...we had 0...ZERO choice in the matter if in Adam we die but then we see so shall ALL in Christ live.
1 Corinthians 15 22
I dont believe this will be everyone at first but eventually I believe God's will for all to be saved will rule out
@@ttownsupreme2183 look at the next verse. The “all” being referred to are those who belong to Christ. “15:23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. “ the context of the chapter is the resurrection, not that all will eventually be reconciled. Those who are in Adam will die, but those who are in Christ the second Adam will live again.
@@ttownsupreme2183 I think Universalism is one step to far. I wish it were true but it's very clear that unsaved will be destroyed for eternity.
Phil seems to think that soul sleep is only believed by "cult groups", however Martin Luther and several other reformation leaders believed in soul sleep and conditional immortality.
UNLEARN the lies Matthew 27:53 ►
Verse (Click for Chapter)
New International Version
They came out of the tombs after Jesus' resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
It was Martin Luther's saying that death would be like going to sleep you wake up at the resurrection having no sense of the passage of time. Was where the concept of soul sleep came from.
Word!
@@jamesmccluskey7551care to make application of Mat27:53 to the Conditional Immortality vs ECT topic?
I'm new to the subject and trying to understand
Thank you.
To destroy both body and soul in Gehenna is as plain as day - how do you destroy a body forever?? Tradition loses - conditional immortality wins.
Amen
"I don't see how" and "it seems to me" do not lead to "Thus, it's more likely."
you gets owned by him
Truly I tell you today, you will be with me in heaven. There was no punctuation added till 900AD. Reread that and see the difference.
Also he said paradise not heaven.
Chris is such a good debater. He can make pretty much anyone look kind of silly no matter what they’re defending.
I would agree he is good but that's because he has an easy position to defend here. On other topics I have seen him struggle, such as his debate with Steve Gregg on The Israel of God. It's easy to win with CI because ECT has no good arguments except tradition and orthodoxy, which are not arguments really anyway.
@@michaelnewzealand1888 Very true.
Amazing debate. Good job, Chris.
Phil says if he had believed in annihilation, he would not have come to Christ. This means he would not even care about eternal life unless there is eternal torment. What does that say ? To me it says he does not truly love God but fears eternal torment. People, we are not saved by fear. We are saved because we love God and fellowman. Yes we need to fear God. But that is not what saves us ! It is our LOVE ! So if a man says he would not come to Christ if it were not for the fear of eternal torment, what has saved him ? Fear or love ? I'm afraid too many people base their salvation on the wrong concept. Your faith and love of others is what Christ taught would give us eternal life. So in a nutshell, if you are living your life trying to just stay out of hell, you are not truly following Christ. Sorry, you are just trying to fake your way out of eternal torment and if it is true, that's where you will be ! Study your bibles everyday and learn. Godspeed !
Again Truthhunter I see a post by you. Once again, thank you for your logic.
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom Proverbs 9:10
John 16:8 And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment.
When the Holy Spirit convicts the sinner they know that God would be just send them to hell.
+Sean Walsh Becareful of your interpretations, that they don't interfere with the reasonable concept of a loving and merciful God. A loving Creator does not force eternity, whether it be Heaven, "hell" or purgatory. The first thing the serpent said to Adam and Eve, when you eat from the tree of knowledge, "you shall certainly not die." Catholism, the oldest Christian religion, has taught of "default" immortality through the explanation of purgatory.
In 325 AD, along with Roman Emporer Constantine, the pope also changed the Saturday sabbath to Sunday Lord's day.
Wow even though I'm a "Traditionalist" I have to admit Chris took the debate here.
Eric Brown Are you still a traditionalist?
Are you saying his performance was great or that the scripture he brought up is actually convincing?
Of course Chris took the debate. He knows the position, and the position is truly scriptural. He proves it all the time now, especially Monday nights.
All I can say is that from personal experience I failed miserably in following the Lord out of fear of Hell! 😱
We're all screwups. God knows this. He mercifully gives us a way to avoid the death consequence of that.
How can one have eternality and yet not live forever? It seemed like a square circle that Phil was arguing for with that statement.
Phil says at around 1:34 that he does not believe that those in hell would experience eternal life, he says that they are not living, the quality would not be what could be classified as living, however he says that the lost would have eternal consciousness in hell. see folks this is what a messed up theology does to you, this is how the devil can deceive even the most educated of persons, if something is conscious then it definitely has life. why do some theologians believe when you are knocked out you dont know anything, but when you are dead you are conscious of everything.
Hahahaha exactly. When did these words change to cause the confusion. It's like everyone knows what death means but they selectively change the meaning to suit the fancy of their EISEGESIS.
If you think it through, the fact that the language is confusing within the mind and presentation of the traditionalist PROVES there is something wrong in understanding which has been ignored because of how widespread the misinterpretation is so they let each other get away with it.
Until a Conditionalist is apt to demand a coherent explanation.
Chris' opening statement basically hinted that this would happen when he ended his first round by reminding the audience that interpretations must be held to the entire scripture on the topic, within context. And not piece meal, out of context, interpreted in context to tradition and presuppositional assumptions forced onto it.
This is a great debate, however I'm not a fan of the constant reference to beliefs of other people. I don't really see how that has to do with the doctrine itself. Whether something is right or wrong isn't dependent on who believes it.
There will be no day and night in Eternity! Day and Night are part of time.. When the new Heaven and Earth are created there will not even be a sun. Do you think that there will be day and night in Hell which is darkness?
Regarding Phil's point about the church not possibly getting it wrong for so many centuries. In every generation, theological traditions are passed down which inform our presuppositions, and people by nature want to stand on the shoulders of those theological giants who have gone before, and be in the correct, "biblical" camp. To step outside the box, or even raise a question, especially in reference to this issue, you risk being labeled a heretic and losing everything. This has also been true in every generation (including possibly losing your life earlier on), so it's no surprise that very few people dared to do this. Just look what's happening now when a few are speaking out.
Here's the what I've concluded with all due respect and humility. Jesus did not spend an eternal conscious suffering in Hell. Therefore the debt paid in our place was not eternal conscious suffering. Therefore Hell is not a place of eternal conscious suffering. Either you believe Jesus suffered in our place or you don't. If Hell is a place of eternal conscious suffering, and Jesus spent only 3 days there, then the debt was not paid in full. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure it's a terrible experience, but punishments need to fit crimes.
For those who dont know, a major problem with Christian physicalism is it poses a problem with regard to the Law of Identity. Once a person dies, he ceases to exist completely. Any future "resurrection" would not be the revivification of the original person, but a creation of a mere copy (identical as the copy may be). It really isn't the same person. In which case, that new person shouldnt be punished because he hasnt committed his own sins. Besides, the original already Died (i.e punished).
Matthew 15:3 He answered them, “And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?
Traditionalists, including Dr. Fernandes in this video, argues that by virtue of being both divine and human, Jesus' finite punishment of torment is the equivalent of the eternal torment awaiting the lost. Therefore, I can simply say the finite duration of his death was the equivalent of the eternal death awaiting the risen and subsequently executed lost. And I think there are other good answers, too.
The soul does not exist without the spirit or breath staying retained in the body.
God formed the Dust and breathed in to it His life spirit, THEN Adam BECAME a living soul.
Body + Breath/Spirit = a Living Soul.
It doesn't matter what the majority believed. Jesus explicitly rejected the belief that the wicked would be eternally tormented by saying they would be completely burned up in fire.
Chris did an amazing job
I agree with most of what Dr Fernandes says, but just still leaning towards Gehenna being total destruction. I believe in God and trust He is good. When we are with Him, we will know. This and evil are the toughest areas for me as a believer.
Immortality is only a gift that is given upon those who are found in Christ. Not to the unsaved!
If you don't look into the doctrine of soul sleep you can't understand the written communication mortality, immortality, eternal life, 2nd death, paradise, sleep, eternal punishment, etc... Soul sleep is both hermeneutical and exegetical. It's consistent from cover to cover. Those who oppose this view must conjure up strange scriptural interpretation to fit their view. They must go through leaps and bounds to have come up with the conclusion and it's usually done by cherry picking new testament bible verses because they trying to validate their preconceived beliefs and reject all of the old testament teaching and then say, "we don't get into the old testament because it didn't have the full revelation". Actually no, they reject OT because their thought process doesn't allow them to put the pieces of the puzzle together. Only with soul sleep can you understand annihilation.
Michael Hurwitz
Yes I would agree, but more importantly it's the judgmental Christians using that theology and slamming it on nonbelievers. Way to win over people to Christ is to love as Christ loved and to walk in the spirit and be lead by the Holy Spirit.
So true!
Seventh-Day Adventist here ... glad to see a careful exposition of Scripture among Evangelicals for once.
If someone believes that eternal damnation is a fair punishment for not being a Christian, then their minds are warped.
Richard Underwood your concept of fairness is based on human emotions and not holy perfection.
Actually eternal damnation is scriptural. Eternal TORMENT is not
@@thesecretstation human conscience that was given by god, and fine tuned by the holy spirit
And the devil who had deceived them was hurled into the lake of fire and burning brimstone (sulfur), where the beast (Antichrist) and false prophet are also; and they will be tormented day and night, forever and ever.
@@yahshuasaves3726 if I am not mistaken, the Greek form of the phrase "forever and ever" does not mean eternal
2:12:00 great answer from Chris. "The Great commission is about Conversion PLUS discipleship"
some of Phil's arguments are laughably childish
It seems then the strongest passage for eternal torment is "they have no rest day or night". The first part of this verse from Revelation was shown to be the same as a finite event from the past. However, since it is apocalyptic imagery, a literal interpretation becomes suspect. I'm reminded of Psalm 95:11, which is quoted in Hebrews 4:5 saying, "They shall not enter my rest." Since this part of Revelation is imagery, a fair correlation can be made. The wicked therefore have no biblical "rest" day or night.
John Virgilio Right you mean they can't rest because they are dead right?
grich05 I thought they'd be resting forever
Who has no rest day or night?
Satan, "Eat it Eve, YOU SHALL NOT SURELY DIE." [you will live in hell forever]
traditional hell = believing the first lie of Satan himself, plainly shown in the word of God, from the very start.
Exactly. The "immortal soul" doctrine is false, and is not anywhere in the Bible. And it is perpetuating Satan's first lie...that you'll never die, even if you sin. The Bible is clear that sinners will die. Even if you claim that the place that sinners spend eternity in is horrible, that still means that they live forever, and that would mean that sin would always be in existence. But no, God is going to completely wipe out sin when Jesus returns!
@@CherryFrog321 Jesus has already taken wiped out the sins of those who put their faith and trust in the blood atonement of His blood sacrifice for the remission of their sins and reconciled them to God the Father. When a born-again believer dies their physical death in the earth, they are presented without sin to the Father-hence, Jesus has wiped out the sins of those who trust in His blood atonement for their sins to be wiped out.
To say one accepts a nontraditional view will flood out other nontraditional views and to say that one thing is automatically false is ridiculous!
I am so happy I have found this debate. I’m struggling to get back into the faith. I will say, the thought of an eternal torment doesn’t make me want to go to God. It makes me resent him because nobody asked to be born, and to threaten everyone with eternal burning is not love. You cannot hold a threat over someone’s head if they don’t choose you and call it love.
That said, the idea that those who go to hell simply are set away into nonexistence sounds far more merciful and just to me. That makes me want to learn more and become closer.
Why? Because it shows that God wouldn’t want to have his creations tormenting forever, he’d want to get a judgement over with and move on to be with his children. The ones in eternal torment are the original betrayers by way of satan and the fallen. The humans are destroyed.
If that is the case, I find it easier to look at God in a loving way.
Denzell Lewis hell is torment forever
Maya Nezha how loving.!
Denzell Lewis God Can do whatever he wants. He created us.
Maya Nezha how free.
Denzell Lewis like it or not.
I am thankful for Jehovah’s Witnesses for exposing eternal torment as a lie. How unjust for God to torture people for eternity for sins committed over a relatively short lifespan. This speaker supporting conscious torment says he was saved because of his fear of hell. How much better to commit to Christ out of love and not fear of fire.
I discussed with a priest why God is merciful. As I expected, he danced around and did not address my points.
Universalism is not consistent with scripture. Likewise, eternal punishment is in contradiction to a loving God.
Traditional Christian denominational interpretations should not trump the use of logic when it comes to scripture.
Sorry Jim,
I'm not sure what you mean when you say that the bible clearly teaches hell when even the most mainstream bibles are being forced to take the word out more and more. It's not even in the O.T. anymore.
Jesus used the words Hades and Gehenna but he never taught about a hell of eternal torment. Paul never even mentioned the words at all, a huge thing to leave out considering his statement that it was given to him to preach the complete message. Most people when I ask them where our doctrine of hell is taught point to the book of revelations...yet it is certainly not taught here either. If a person were to try to use the lake of fire as a replacement for our traditional hell teaching (which there is no doubt it was inspired by these verses but it is CERTAINLY not taught here) this is very inconsistent because of the fact that "hades" (a word translated as hell in many bibles still) which is mentioned by Jesus often in verses of people trying to point to hell in the N.T. gets thrown into the lake of fire in revelation. Hell gets thrown into hell in the KJV! Kind of got themselves in a mess there with their over use of the word not being able to back out of absurdity in the end.
Paul actually is preaching for the majority of his books, unlike the gospels which are more of a (very amazing and edifying) history message with amazing words of christ carried down to us.
He clearly teaches about the salvation of all, how the gift was given to all men, how all men will be saved especially those who believe, how it is the will of god to save all men, how every knee will bow in the end and confess that Jesus is lord and how if you confess then you will be saved. It's an incredibly clear message and it is taught throughout the O.T. as well....
As was promised to Abraham "through your seed ALL THE NATIONS of the earth will be blessed"
By the way, it doesn't help that the two most popular bibles (KJV and NIV) twist their translation according to this tradition of eternal torment. I'd like to paste something I wrote for a comment earlier on this point:
For example the King James and NIV both manipulate the word judgement in John 5:29 as demonstrated below:
27 And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man.
28 “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and come out-those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned. 30 By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me.
KJV says
... and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
So both NIV and KJV which are based on pretty different texts and are on two sides of the traditionalist perspective both imply through the language that the resurrection for the evil is into damnation. Which the dictionary says means "damned to hell"
Pretty clear there huh? If I were a bible believer I guess it's case closed right?
No.Thankfully the scripture was not written by King James and we have access to the greek text here.
biblehub.com/interlinear/john/5-29.htm
Such a clearly different message here in greek,
The greek word used by jesus here "krisis" means judgement, and lest anyone think it's taken out of context judgement is actually a theme here in this part of John 5, the word is used in the previous verses several times and again in the following verse it's very clear the same meaning is intended.
In fact in 5:27 Jesus says:
And he has given him authority to "krisis" because he is the Son of Man.
then 5:29
those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to "krisis".
then the next verse 5:30
By myself I can do nothing; I "krisis" only as I hear, and my "krisis" is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me.
So is Jesus here really teaching in the middle of talking about judgement that those will rise to be condemned? to damnation? No, clearly the point here is that they will rise to judgement "and my judgement is just"
This isn't some twisted conspiracy, it's quite obvious and many bible translations agree including:
New Living Translation
"will rise to experience judgment."
English Standard Version
"resurrection of judgment."
Berean Study Bible
"the resurrection of judgment."
Berean Literal Bible
"resurrection of judgment."
New American Standard Bible
"to a resurrection of judgment."
GOD'S WORD® Translation
"those who have done evil will come back to life and will be judged."
Holman Christian Standard Bible
New Heart English Bible
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
This list will go on forever.
I chose this case because it's an extreme example of the kind of blatant appeal that is made to tradition in 2 of the most widely used bibles in the world.
I could demonstrate very many of these types of scriptures which have absolutely no basis for the english words being used.
A serious study of the bible without any tradition reveals a book which preaches universal salvation in every single place, never contradicted and constantely confirmed. While any arguments for try to justify a dark age tradition of "hell" is based on taking a very few scriptures far out of context or reading in an entire belief into the use of a single greek word, such as Gehenna.
I've heard intelligent men tell me "you know who talked about hell the most don't you? Jesus Christ!" Sounds pretty conclusive obviously I care about Jesus teachings more than anyone else in the bible as he is the WORD of God. However this is also incredibly misleading, Jesus uses words translated as "hell" in some bibles barely 12-13 times depending on translation and many of those are repeats from gospel to gospel. The reason he is the one who says it the most? Because Paul who is the majority of the entire new testament text doesn't talk about hell AT ALL, doesn't use the word a single time. If Jesus had said it at all he'd basically be the one who said it the most because it's not ever taught or mentioned that's what goes unsaid in this argument.
And when Jesus does use one of the words translated as hell (neither of them actually mean hell in a word study and they are being removed from bible translations more and more) we are just supposed to read in our teachings about what hell means based on our tradition...because it's certainly not ever ever taught.
Universal Salvation however isn't vaguely mentioned, but explicitly taught throughout the bible.
Yet people are blind to the truth, they hold on to hell WITH A PASSION. What is with us?
Even though I don't agree with you I gave your post a thumbs up. I really appreciate the quotes from the church fathers about a long lasting punishment which I had not read before and I have read much looking for them. Those writings will take additional study for me, in some cases original greek writings were lost. I had read 2 Clem. but I seem to remember a lot of doubt about its authorship and date. A lot of things which only survived in latin have been known to be edited to suit future beliefs. This is proven with some writers like Origen who is constantly either loved or hated by the church depending on which piece of historical doctrine they are trying to prove (as he wrote so much!). He is very clear in the truth of the nature of Gods judgement, however in some writings which were translated to latin those things were removed or in some cases even overwritten to say something totally different!
I don't know if you read my whole post or just marked me down as a non-everlasting believer and went from there with your post, but I don't believe in annihilation. If you read my previous post you should know what direction I am in.
As far as the scripture itself is concerned, the use of the term "kolasis aionios" or "eternal punishment" which is so often taken as evidence not only from scripture but also from early greek speakers like Origen (I read a catholic book of quotes from church fathers by topic, it had "proof" origen believed in eternal punishment because it had a quote from him using the biblical phrase kolasis aionios.) is something that needs to be studied by all who consider themselves interested in this subject. If those words truly meant what they are translated to in english then the case is closed and the scripture seems quite clear that the wicked would be eternally punished(unless the truth is meant as a deeper mystery or something of the sort). However, after much reading I no longer believe that kolasis aionios mean's what the (mainstream) bibles translate it as. Some literal translations also reflect this. Aionios means age or age to come or of the ages, kolasis is chastisment.
"The word for punishment is kolasis. The word was originally a gardening word, and its original meaning was pruning trees. In Greek there are two words for punishment, timoria and kolasis, and there is a quite definite distinction between them. Aristotle defines the difference; kolasis is for the sake of the one who suffers it; timoria is for the sake of the one who inflicts it. Plato says that no one punishes (kolazei) simply because he has done wrong - that would be to take unreasonable vengeance (timoreitai). We punish (kolazei) a wrong-doer in order that he may not do wrong again (Protagoras 323 E). Clement of Alexandria (Stromateis 4.24; 7.16) defines kolasis as pure discipline, and timoria as the return of evil for evil. Aulus Gellius says that kolasis is given that a man may be corrected; timoria is given that dignity and authority may be vindicated (The Attic Nights7.14). The difference is quite clear in Greek and it is always observed. Timoria is retributive punishment. Kolasis is always given to amend and to cure."
From The Apostles' Creed by William Barclay.
What a blessing to have such a rich library of facts with which to understand the tongue of our holy writings...not something I have learned someone can take for granted in this area.
From youngs literal translation:
Rev 14:11 and the smoke of their torment doth go up to ages of ages; and they have no rest day and night, who are bowing before the beast and his image, also if any doth receive the mark of his name.
20:10 and the Devil, who is leading them astray, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where [are] the beast and the false prophet, and they shall be tormented day and night to the ages of the ages.
Mat 25:41 Then shall he say also to those on the left hand, Go ye from me, the cursed, to the fire, the age-during, that hath been prepared for the Devil and his messenger
Mat 25:46 46 And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.'
And unquenchable just means it will not be put out, until it burns out completely. The same word is used of the fires of Jerusalem and obviously it is no longer burning.
Paul talks about the "end of the ages" as the final end time, this is something that would take a while to explain since I assume you're not familiar with the ages of correction and purification. There is so much which is different from traditional understanding in a more biblical view of the book of revelations that it would take a longer post than this one to explain it all, I wouldn't mind to write it but I'd want to feel like you'd actually read it first.
We see the bible talking about "age to come" "ages to come" there are more ages to go, you even see in revelation 20:10 "day and night forever and ever" (your translation) but we know from the next few verses that there will be no more day or night once the kingdom has been established.
I also have several quotes from early fathers who use the words "aionion" (your word for eternal) but then proceed to say something like "and then after that..." which makes no sense with current understanding.
If you seem interested I would love to go deeper, let me know Jim I really enjoyed your post especially the fathers quotes I was not expecting that. That is why I like to have these discussions because it directs my learning in new areas and keeps my search alive and interesting :D
JC Pocket you've done a lot of investigation.
One thing I've noticed about different Christian religions, you can go to any one and study their doctrine and have biblical proof of those translations of scripture to fit their arguments.
In the end I ask myself if there is a God, would I worship One who holds a gun to my head and says: worship me or else I'll ensure you suffer forever it. The answer is no; atheism as the possibility of no God would be far more appealing.
+Fred Murphy i love you fred murphy, and i love that you are even spending time here. Your journey fills me with hope and joy for you.
ever since i learned the truth of gods message which had been hidden for so long i have felt so free to be able to love my fellow human on this earth. i think hell doctrines cause us to automatically look down on people even if we dont mean to, how can you let yourself love all of the strangers in the world when you think they will burn justly with fire forever? there is a mental block that kept my love inside compared to the way it is now. fred you know what is beautiful? God is beautiful (sorry about my punctuation and grammar I'm on my phone laying down). how many people hear the message coming from so many churches as one of good news? you sure dont, but not only you youtube comments are full of people who cant stand Christians and their message, outright hate. its an ugly message, hey let me tell you about this guy and by the way if you dont believe what im telling you prepare for the worst torment for all of existence!
its crazy to think the bible teaches this...
we have been given a beautiful gift by god himself who loved us so much he gave his son because we could have never earned this gift our selves! the gift of life! a life that promises no more tears and no more sorrow a life that never ends.
you have recieved this gift because of jesus sacrifice, he did this for you out of pure love expecting nothing in return. however, christ has also made a way for you to be made whole(saved in a manner of speaking but that word is overused by people who dont know what it means) TODAY right now you dont have to wait for the age to come, which is promised to us now.
so the question naturally is how, right? well im sure youve been told this before by people who were telling you about getting tortured but the truth is right there so so close....love sets you free from sorrow even in this life, and if you can believe really believe what jesus did for you and what it means then you will begin to feel that spirit of love which is gods holy spirit filling into you. your whole world view will change and things become really beautiful, people become really beautiful, like you and this other nice man. when you can really believe this it really will complete a part of your soul which has been waiting this whole time....jesus said the kingdom was with in us our peace is RIGHT HERE and we just have to grab on to it and TRUST it. the greek word used when jesus is talking about believing, it also means trust. when people in the bible teach that to be made whole you have to believe its not a condition "you better believe as a payment for this grace!" its just an instruction to be better able to feel that which you already have been given! if you can only trust, believe, in other words of you really accepted this to be true it would make you whole and give you peace and joy in your life.
its done it for me, and im far from perfect.
also, it becomes wonderful to read good messages in the scripture again.
Thanks Jim for your reply!
I'm sorry you felt I missed some of your points, I tried to get them all I will go back over it again in this reply :)
I'll start from the beginning, you asked :
"If there is no hell, why repent?"
I'm going by scripture Jim, which is not to say that there is no judgement. I do feel however that this argument gets a little arbitrary at this point. A mainstream christian might ask the question "What's the point of Jesus at all if everyone gets saved!" or in your case "why repent if everyone gets saved!". The reason I call it arbitrary is because the same questions can be asked of any view and they are not easy to answer. A man could ask "why should I strive to be sin free if all I have to do is say a prayer and ask for forgiveness after" both of our beliefs (I'm assuming you're in the mainstream but some people have variations feel free to correct me) forgive people of their sins, after they have sinned. The difference is in your belief a person must ask for it, in mine Jesus asked for it. In both cases one could ask "why do good? if I can be forgiven". Now I will say the bible is clear that everyone will come to repentance, no wickedness will enter the kingdom of God. In both of our views you will repent to be granted access into Gods kingdom and be made pure. The difference is the time frame. The scripture does not teach that this repenting must happen before you die, in fact in many places demonstrates people being saved from the grave.
NLT Rom 8:38
"And I am convinced that nothing can ever separate us from God's love. Neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither our fears for today nor our worries about tomorrow--not even the powers of hell can separate us from God's love."
NIV Rom 14:9
"For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living."
KJV 1 PET 3:19-20
"19By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 20Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."
NIV 1 PET 4:6
"For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to human standards in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit."
That verse 1 PET 4:6 is teaching a very clear message which is lost in todays christian world view, there are so many scriptures which do not make sense anymore and have to be mauled and twisted in order to fit with todays unforgiving message. Here it clearly shows that you will be judged according to your fleshly acts however you will live according to God in the spirit. Our fleshly deeds are that wood hay and stubble which Paul preaches about, which we have built on our foundation of christ (who is the foundation of all things not just believers) which is to be burned away so that our spirits will be saved
KJV 1cor 3:15
"If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire."
There are many verses throughout the whole bible which show God uses fire for purification not for punishment, although sometimes being purified can hurt.
Let me get a nice quote from antiquity here on this subject lest you try to warp these scriptures to fit our new watered down views...
Origen (184/185 - 253/254CE) when teaching about this subject here is the full text however I'll summarize books.google.com/books?id=_WZKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA173&lpg=PA173&dq=origen+on+wood+hay+stubble&source=bl&ots=NIXig3WPDh&sig=FVU1wSG-dgDN5N7FrC1lXYRKTxA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiMkf6XvdXOAhUG3SYKHdHWAbwQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=origen%20on%20wood%20hay%20stubble&f=false
"But when He is said to be a "consuming fire", we inquire what are the things which are appropriate to be consumed by God. And we assert that wickedness, and the works which result from it, and which, being figuratively called "wood, hay, stubble," God consumes as a fire."
He then goes to call this person "the wicked man" often when I read this scripture to people they try to turn this among many other scriptures into a "believers only" event that is not true. He goes on to say "If any one can show that these words were differently understood by the writer, and can prove the wicked man literally builds up "wood, or hay, or stubble," it is evident that the fire must be understood to be material....but if on the contrary, the works of the wicked man are spoken of figuratively under the names "wood, or hay, or stubble," why does it not at once occur [to inquire[ in what sense the word "fire" is to be taken"
Then he goes on to say "what what work can be spoken of in these words as being "burned," save all that results from wickedness? Therefore our God is a "consuming fire" in the sense in which we have taken the word; and thus he enters in as a "refiners fire," to refine the rational nature, which has been filled with the lead of wickedness....And in like manner, "rivers of fire" are said to be before God, who will thoroughly cleanse away the evil which is intermingled throughout the whole soul."
These things happen, according to Paul, on judgement day.
(have to split this reply in 2)
My question is why didn’t God warn Adam and Eve that their fate would be ECT? How come he simply said they would merely die when they ate the fruit? These are the first human beings, I think God would’ve saw it fit to warn them about ECT as opposed to just death. Especially since God commanded them to multiply and knew that their sin would inherently affect adam and eves posterity, who don’t even exist yet and essentially are helpless in how God would perceive them as a direct result of their parents behavior. ECT would be of paramount importance in a warning and it would have to be made as clear as one could make it to be a valid warning. You can’t just say “hey you’ll die” and then after the transgression be like “hey forgot to mention death means unending torment” like what?! Wish you would’ve made that clear.
this was great to watch though
Very interesting debate. Although I’m currently leaning toward universal reconciliation (NOT the same as universalism), I found Chris’s opening statement very compelling.
Jesus told us to "beware of the leaven of the Pharisees" - The Pharisees were obsessed with punishing, stoning, and crucifying people. That was there mojo. So eternal torment is a teaching the Pharisees would promote.
All I can say is that you really (REALLY!) need to read the Bible. I mean, we're only 3 chapters in and God is telling people they'll die if they eat a piece of fruit. Why not just swat their hands, right? And another 3 chapters further, and God is destroying the entire planet of all humans by drowning them.
Rest assured, God is quite concerned about punishing evil. Every single prophet, apostle and even Jesus Himself spoke more about the judgement to come than any other topic.
(I guess that's a long way of saying your approach to understanding Jesus' comments about the Pharisees is waaaay far off the mark.)
I'm still trying to understand all this per the scriptures but I very much appreciate Chris Date's direct answer at 1:17:12
Wasting all this time debating on God's hell instead of out in the world telling people how they can escape eternal damnation. The devil is pleased.
***** that's Calvinist garabge you're propagating. You have been lied to but you have hardened neck and you will not hear the Word of the Lord therefore you will eat the fruit of your own devices.
Maybe its more important to discuss what we actually believe and how we should interpret it before we go out in the world like a bunch of fools...
+Christ saves sinners exactly, it's incredibly intellectually lazy.
Madara that's for the unlearned. The Holy Ghost teaches us all things. Hell is everlasting punishment. Period. No where does God tell us to interpret the bible because the scripture is of no private interpretation. You know what's really lazy? Men who sit in their offices, writing books, and holding seminars "interpreting" the word of God instead of out knocking doors, going from house to house proclaiming the good news of the gospel. Men like N.T Wright, William Lane Craig, etc are hypocrites and they have all their worldly accolades like being a master of theology. What a bunch of crap.
"They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind..." Jeremiah 19:5 KJV
Jeremiah 32:35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.
Leviticus 18:21 And you shall not let any of your seed pass through the fire to Molech, …
2 Kings 17:17 They sacrificed their sons and daughters in the fire. They practiced divination and sought omens and sold themselves to do evil in the eyes of the LORD, arousing his anger.
these passages should settle it once and for all...God does not like the concept, the idea of, burning human beings alive in fire.So, obviously, that is not something that God will do. However. will all this overwhelming evidence convince most 'hellators' ?...not in my experience. They seem to want to hold onto the belief that God torments people forever.
good debate. Annihilationism is a fact. To explain why JWs and some cults see it the proper way but are wrong about other issues is simple - as they broke tradition of the many essential doctrine because of no commitment to the historical tradition (such as deity of Christ etc...) so it was easy for them to break tradition on a fact as well. The church was right about much of the majors but some of the minors are still being refined as we are still being "lead and guided into all truth" by the Holy Spirit.
I have to laugh at the people that want to discount annihilationism because the JW's and Seventh Day Adventists adhere to it as well.
REALLY? You want to go down THAT road? OK, fine. ALLL the PAGAN religions adhere to eternal torment, from ancient Egypt to the Babylonians, the Greeks and the Romans.
NOW, tell me which is worse, Paganism with all its sex orgies and ritualistic human sacrifices or 7th Day Adventism?
You pretty much have to shun all logic and reason to hold onto such a satanic and sadistic doctrine as ECT, especially when the Bible clearly states from Genesis to Revelations the fate of the wicked is death, perish, consumed, destroyed, burned up, ashes, vanished, no more, etc.
*No one is going to be tortured or annihilated! All will be saved! Jesus Christ already took the judgment and punishment the world deserved!* Before going to the cross Jesus said... John 12 v31 *Now is the judgment of this world:* now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
Philippians 2 vs10-11
10so that *at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and ON EARTH and UNDER THE EARTH, 11and that every tongue will confess that JESUS CHRIST IS LORD,* to the glory of God the Father.
All that were made sinners by Adam will be made righteous by Jesus Christ!
Romans 5
19For just as through the disobedience of the one man *THE MANY were made sinners,* so also through the obedience of the one man *THE MANY will be made righteous.*
Heresy. Not everyone will be saved. Why does it say that people will be cast into the lake of fire in Rev 20:15, 21:8?
The atonement of Jesus Christ makes salvation possible, but not automatic. Salvation is conditional upon repentant faith in Christ - John 3:16-18. People are still spiritually dead unless they accept Jesus Christ as their Savior. That's why one must be born again & have their sins washed away (John 3:3-8, Rom 5:9, Eph 1:7)
There's a broad way that leads to destruction and many are on that path and narrow is the way leading to life, which only a few find (Matt 7:13-14). Jesus is the only way to heaven (John 14:6, John 10:9, Acts 4:12), There's Judgment Day of punishment for the wicked (Matt 25:46, 1 Cor 6:9-11, 2 Thess 1:8-9, Rev 21:8)
You're teaching Universalism and denying what the Bible says. Everyone can be saved but not all will be saved. It's a person's choice. God bess.
Godwin Adjei *Fire in the Bible is usually symbolic not literal fire!*
Proverbs 25
21If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink:
22For thou shalt *heap coals of fire upon his head,* and the LORD shall reward thee.
*Not literal Fire!*
*Believers works are tried by fire but not literal fire!*
1 Corinthians 3
15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: *but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.*
*God is Love but God is also a Consuming Fire but likely not a literal fire!*
1 John 4
16And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. *God is love;* and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.
Hebrews 12
*29For our God is a consuming fire.*
*Since God is love and a consuming fire then God's lake of fire could be symbolic for a lake of God's consuming love!*
*This makes sense if being loving to your enemy, giving them food and water is symbolically heaping coals of fire on their head, right?*
Proverbs 25
21If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink:
22For thou shalt *heap coals of fire upon his head,* and the LORD shall reward thee.
These verses you brought up have totally different context:
- 1 Cor 3:1-15 talks against Apollos/Paul division, about trial of works, loss of rewards, based on their quality.
- 1 John 4 is true. God is love but he's also holy and just. Love doesn't negate justice. We're always commanded to love Matt 22:36-40, Jn 13:34-35
- God is a consuming fire, no wonder the sons of Aron got consumed by God inside the tabernacle for offering profane/strange incense fire in Leviticus 10. That's just his attribute.
It also says same thing in Rom 12, when we're commanded to overcome evil with good, cos God says "vengeance is mine".
The Bible says consistently hell is place of eternal punishment:
- Furnace of Fire, where there's Weeping & gnashing of teeth - Matt 13:42 (What's symbolic about that?)
- In the lake of fire: God's wrath full strength, fire & brimstone, no rest day/night, smoke of torment rises forever & ever - Rev 14:9-11. It doesn't symbolize God's "consuming love" at all. Nowhere does it say that.
In Genesis 19 God destroyed Sodom & Gomorrah with fire & brimstone - is that symbolic?
Phil’s 8 reasons to embrace ECT are what convinces me of CI
Yeah he thinks the soul and spirit are the same thing. Humans are spiritually dead while they are alive on earth with body and soul. Its only if someone is born-again that someone is spiritually alive. Hell is the place where the spiritually dead go to experience the death of their body for the first time, and the death of their soul.
I don't understand what Chris meant about the atonement being completed on the cross. Wasn't the atonement complete when the high priest came out of the most Holy place to show that the sacrifice was accepted? This seems to be what Hebrews 9:28 indicates.
We can trust the image God has gifted us.
The greatest motivation for believing in Christ is his love for you! Not a fear of being eternally punished and tormented in hell.
Did Jesus not say work out your salvation each man his own in fear and trembling? Did he not say that?
I would love to hear Chris give a teaching on the subject outside of the debate. I want to hear at a slower pace so I can absorb all you have to share through the word.
Thankful for all your study to bring light to this subject. numbers 6:24-26:)).
Rethinking Hell on RUclips or website
I had to set my phone to x.75 speed. First time in my history of RUclips.
I want to believe ECT but after watching like 20 debates and reading a million books, ECT has no leg to stand on!
Yes indeed, greater Christian leaders than these two have defended ECT with no better arguments which tells you there aren't any
Why would you want to?
I truly believe that if God were to infallibly communicate to all the world that the conscious torments of hell were not eternal, MANY Christians would not be in church next Sunday.
Believers in ECT (which I lean toward) need to take seriously this question, do you long for heaven? Or do you desire ardently to escape hell?
Upon reading that, most people's minds gave the Sunday school answer. Really tho, ponder it. You can lie even to yourself, but you cannot lie to God.
What's frightful about hell to you: is it being away from the Lord? Does the thought of that make you sad?
It's not blinding me at all. I'm completely open to dualism being true and I already genuinely believe that a real ontological & spiritual change that occurs in regeneration.
wow i love the debaters and the spirit of friendship and sticking to the Bible
My sister in law left Christianity because of the doctrine of ECT in hell.
Notice too that the development of the specialized use of the word "Gehenna" didn't occur in the OT, but during the intertestamental period with all their connotations.
That part of day and night thing is explained better when you take the next verses. It's about the legacy of evil.
What do you mean Kristoffer can you elaborate?
Jeremiah 12:3 But thou, O Lord, knowest me: thou hast seen me, and tried mine heart toward thee: pull them out like sheep for the slaughter, and _prepare them for the day of slaughter._
Here are a couple of honest questions perhaps someone can answer. If annihilation is true. At some point during the conscience suffering all sin is paid for and now you are annihilated. If your sins are now paid for wouldn't those that hold to universalism be valid that now you are worthy of heaven instead of annihilation? Here is also an honest question in which I don't know the answer. If during life you hated God and lived a life of defiance and rebellion as Romans reveals, at death or the resurrection do you still have a defiance and hatred towards God? In other words wouldn't you still maintain a hatred for God and continue sinning? If so wouldn't you continue to be punished never really paying for your sins? Thanks for your input.
I've never said that "only the physical death of Christ was necessary for the atonement." I explicitly said in my opening statement that the punishment Jesus bore as our substitute in our place was "suffering and death."
CI easily answers the question "Why the God-man?" 1) Because only the death of the God-man can serve as the substitutionary atoning death for all mankind. 2) Because only the God-man could rise from death and live forever to intercede for his people.
Jesus died for us.
Chris Date gets a lot closer to the truth on the issue of eternal judgment.
You see, you are responding to a misconception of annihilationism in which the wicked fully pay the penalty for their sin and *then* are annihilated, but that's not our view. Our view is that "the wages of sin is death." Though inflicted by painful means (as was the Lord's substitutionary death), it is the deprivation of life, not ongoing conscious suffering, with which the wicked are punished in hell.
Phil's opening was an appeal to authority, teadition and ad hoc; exegesis(he doesn't even treat the extra-biblical texts he uses correctly)
Does the rest of his debate time..go this bad
Guess his first rebuttal(if you can call it that answers that question..