dermdoc said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

Do you have a link?

---

To what?

---

To Paul Washer's sermon or lecture or whatever it was.

---

Just google Paul Washer's quotes on hell. Numerous links including full sermons.

And if anyone can find any sermons in the NT that are similar or echo this theology, please inform me. Where did this theology come from?

---

The specific quote you posted to start this thread is shocking but the whole sermon is very good.

---

I will have to listen to the whole thing. Thanks.

Read the pdf and he and I have have completely different theologies His is very fear and wrath based, mine is love based. He is penal substitutionary atonement. I am Christus Victor. He believes in a judicial salvation. I believe in an ontological one. Would not want my kids or grand kids to listen to his sermons. Very wary of any fear based theology. Do not think it is Biblical.
Am sure he is sincere, just different theologies/soteriologies.

The difference is I do not think he is going to hell for our differences in theology. I bet he thinks I am. Thank God no man can scare or send anyone to hell.
And this sounds nothing like the sermons in the New Testament I have read.
I would love to ask him the question of where in Scripture it states that Jesus came to save us from hell.

---

Well the person who spoke of Hell most in the NT was Jesus and He didn't mince His words.

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

Do you have a link?

---

To what?

---

To Paul Washer's sermon or lecture or whatever it was.

---

Just google Paul Washer's quotes on hell. Numerous links including full sermons.

And if anyone can find any sermons in the NT that are similar or echo this theology, please inform me. Where did this theology come from?

---

The specific quote you posted to start this thread is shocking but the whole sermon is very good.

---

I will have to listen to the whole thing. Thanks.

Read the pdf and he and I have have completely different theologies His is very fear and wrath based, mine is love based. He is penal substitutionary atonement. I am Christus Victor. He believes in a judicial salvation. I believe in an ontological one. Would not want my kids or grand kids to listen to his sermons. Very wary of any fear based theology. Do not think it is Biblical.
Am sure he is sincere, just different theologies/soteriologies.

The difference is I do not think he is going to hell for our differences in theology. I bet he thinks I am. Thank God no man can scare or send anyone to hell.
And this sounds nothing like the sermons in the New Testament I have read.
I would love to ask him the question of where in Scripture it states that Jesus came to save us from hell.

---

Well the person who spoke of Hell most in the NT was Jesus and He didn't mince His words.

---

I have heard that a million times and it really drove me to look at the original Greek and what Jesus actually said. And to who he was actually talking to.

First of all, he was speaking to Jews who had no concept of a hell place. The actual Greek word referred to Gehenna which is well know valley outside of Jerusalem. It was where bodies were dumped after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. And was where Molech worshippers had sacrificed babies. A lot of theologians believe when Christ was speaking these things, he was warning the Jews about 70AD and not eternal hell.

The pluck out your eye or cut off your hand quotes are considered to be hyperbolic statements by most scholars. Jesus used this all the time like hate your parents.

The quote about fearing the one who can destroy body and soul never mentions punishment, only destruction.
The only verse that really can be used by infernalists with any degree of reliability is Matthew 25 46 and that is because the same word aionis is used to describe the length of life and punishment.
It is very tricky as that word usually means of an age and not eternal but I will concede that favors eternal punishment.

What is interesting is kolasis is the word used for punishment. It is usually translated as pruning or redemptive correction. Timoria is the Greek word for vindictive punishment.
Either way, I do not want either and will get neither as a born again believer.
The other thing about the sheep and goats parable is that it is specifically talking about nations and not individuals.

The word hell was actually created by the KJV translators and is very inaccurate. Same word Sheol in the OT is translated hell half the time and the grave the other half. And it was always translated to suggest ECT hell. Read up about King James and I think you will understand why that is.

You probably disagree with everything I typed which is fine. From my reading, Jesus talked very little about heaven or hell.
Paul, God's chosen evangelist to the Gentiles never mentioned hell. Seems very odd since you would think it would be a pretty big deal and teaching point.

And Jesus and Paul preached much more about how to live this life than anything about the afterlife. Jesus said much more about helping the poor and needy than heaven or hell.

And I can not find any NT sermons that are anything like Washer, Lawson, MacArthur, Piper, etc. on this subject. Seems odd.

Would love to ask any of these guys to give me a Scripture that states Jesus came to save us from hell. And why use fear based theology?

dermdoc said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

Do you have a link?

---

To what?

---

To Paul Washer's sermon or lecture or whatever it was.

---

Just google Paul Washer's quotes on hell. Numerous links including full sermons.

And if anyone can find any sermons in the NT that are similar or echo this theology, please inform me. Where did this theology come from?

---

The specific quote you posted to start this thread is shocking but the whole sermon is very good.

---

I will have to listen to the whole thing. Thanks.

Read the pdf and he and I have have completely different theologies His is very fear and wrath based, mine is love based. He is penal substitutionary atonement. I am Christus Victor. He believes in a judicial salvation. I believe in an ontological one. Would not want my kids or grand kids to listen to his sermons. Very wary of any fear based theology. Do not think it is Biblical.
Am sure he is sincere, just different theologies/soteriologies.

The difference is I do not think he is going to hell for our differences in theology. I bet he thinks I am. Thank God no man can scare or send anyone to hell.
And this sounds nothing like the sermons in the New Testament I have read.
I would love to ask him the question of where in Scripture it states that Jesus came to save us from hell.

---

Well the person who spoke of Hell most in the NT was Jesus and He didn't mince His words.

---

I have heard that a million times and it really drove me to look at the original Greek and what Jesus actually said. And to who he was actually talking to.

First of all, he was speaking to Jews who had no concept of a hell place. The actual Greek word referred to Gehenna which is well know valley outside of Jerusalem. It was where bodies were dumped after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. And was where Molech worshippers had sacrificed babies. A lot of theologians believe when Christ was speaking these things, he was warning the Jews about 70AD and not eternal hell.

The pluck out your eye or cut off your hand quotes are considered to be hyperbolic statements by most scholars. Jesus used this all the time like hate your parents.

The quote about fearing the one who can destroy body and soul never mentions punishment, only destruction.
The only verse that really can be used by internalize with any degree of reliability is Matthew 25 46 and that is because the same word aionis is used to describe the length of life and punishment.
It is very tricky as that word usually means of an age and not eternal but I will concede that favors eternal punishment.

What is interesting is kolasis is the word used for punishment is usually translated as pruning or redemptive correction. Timoria is the Greek word for vindictive punishment.
Either way, I do not want either and will get neither as a born again believer.
The other thing about the sheep and goats parable is that it is specifically talking about nations and not individuals.

The word hell was actually created by the KJV translators and is very inaccurate. Same word Sheol in the OT is translated hell half the time and the grave the other half. And it was always translated to suggest ECT hell. Read up about King James and I think you will understand why that is.

You probably disagree with everything I typed which is fine. From my reading, Jesus talked very little about heaven or hell.
Paul, God's chosen evangelist to the Gentiles never mentioned hell. Seems very odd since you would think it would be a pretty big deal and teaching point.

And Jesus and Paul preached much more about how to live this life than anything about the afterlife. Jesus said much more about helping the poor and needy than heaven or hell.

And I can not find any NT sermons that are anything like Washer, Lawson, MacArthur, Piper, etc. on this subject. Seems odd.

Would love to ask any of these guys to give me a Scripture that states Jesus came to save us from hell. And why use fear based theology?

---

Yes, I've seen these arguments on this board many times. And I always ask then what is He saving us from. There is something. Guess we just disagree on what that something is.

dermdoc said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

Do you have a link?

---

To what?

---

To Paul Washer's sermon or lecture or whatever it was.

---

Just google Paul Washer's quotes on hell. Numerous links including full sermons.

And if anyone can find any sermons in the NT that are similar or echo this theology, please inform me. Where did this theology come from?

---

The specific quote you posted to start this thread is shocking but the whole sermon is very good.

---

I will have to listen to the whole thing. Thanks.

Read the pdf and he and I have have completely different theologies His is very fear and wrath based, mine is love based. He is penal substitutionary atonement. I am Christus Victor. He believes in a judicial salvation. I believe in an ontological one. Would not want my kids or grand kids to listen to his sermons. Very wary of any fear based theology. Do not think it is Biblical.
Am sure he is sincere, just different theologies/soteriologies.

The difference is I do not think he is going to hell for our differences in theology. I bet he thinks I am. Thank God no man can scare or send anyone to hell.
And this sounds nothing like the sermons in the New Testament I have read.
I would love to ask him the question of where in Scripture it states that Jesus came to save us from hell.

---

Well the person who spoke of Hell most in the NT was Jesus and He didn't mince His words.

---

Would love to ask any of these guys to give me a Scripture that states Jesus came to save us from hell. And why use fear based theology?

---

Romans 5:9
Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

Do you have a link?

---

To what?

---

To Paul Washer's sermon or lecture or whatever it was.

---

Just google Paul Washer's quotes on hell. Numerous links including full sermons.

And if anyone can find any sermons in the NT that are similar or echo this theology, please inform me. Where did this theology come from?

---

The specific quote you posted to start this thread is shocking but the whole sermon is very good.

---

I will have to listen to the whole thing. Thanks.

Read the pdf and he and I have have completely different theologies His is very fear and wrath based, mine is love based. He is penal substitutionary atonement. I am Christus Victor. He believes in a judicial salvation. I believe in an ontological one. Would not want my kids or grand kids to listen to his sermons. Very wary of any fear based theology. Do not think it is Biblical.
Am sure he is sincere, just different theologies/soteriologies.

The difference is I do not think he is going to hell for our differences in theology. I bet he thinks I am. Thank God no man can scare or send anyone to hell.
And this sounds nothing like the sermons in the New Testament I have read.
I would love to ask him the question of where in Scripture it states that Jesus came to save us from hell.

---

Well the person who spoke of Hell most in the NT was Jesus and He didn't mince His words.

---

I have heard that a million times and it really drove me to look at the original Greek and what Jesus actually said. And to who he was actually talking to.

First of all, he was speaking to Jews who had no concept of a hell place. The actual Greek word referred to Gehenna which is well know valley outside of Jerusalem. It was where bodies were dumped after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. And was where Molech worshippers had sacrificed babies. A lot of theologians believe when Christ was speaking these things, he was warning the Jews about 70AD and not eternal hell.

The pluck out your eye or cut off your hand quotes are considered to be hyperbolic statements by most scholars. Jesus used this all the time like hate your parents.

The quote about fearing the one who can destroy body and soul never mentions punishment, only destruction.
The only verse that really can be used by internalize with any degree of reliability is Matthew 25 46 and that is because the same word aionis is used to describe the length of life and punishment.
It is very tricky as that word usually means of an age and not eternal but I will concede that favors eternal punishment.

What is interesting is kolasis is the word used for punishment is usually translated as pruning or redemptive correction. Timoria is the Greek word for vindictive punishment.
Either way, I do not want either and will get neither as a born again believer.
The other thing about the sheep and goats parable is that it is specifically talking about nations and not individuals.

The word hell was actually created by the KJV translators and is very inaccurate. Same word Sheol in the OT is translated hell half the time and the grave the other half. And it was always translated to suggest ECT hell. Read up about King James and I think you will understand why that is.

You probably disagree with everything I typed which is fine. From my reading, Jesus talked very little about heaven or hell.
Paul, God's chosen evangelist to the Gentiles never mentioned hell. Seems very odd since you would think it would be a pretty big deal and teaching point.

And Jesus and Paul preached much more about how to live this life than anything about the afterlife. Jesus said much more about helping the poor and needy than heaven or hell.

And I can not find any NT sermons that are anything like Washer, Lawson, MacArthur, Piper, etc. on this subject. Seems odd.

Would love to ask any of these guys to give me a Scripture that states Jesus came to save us from hell. And why use fear based theology?

---

Yes, I've seen these arguments on this board many times. And I always ask then what is He saving hs from. There is something. Guess we just disagree on what that something is.

---

He says why He came when He quoted Isaiah. To give hope to the poor, eyesight to the blind, etc.

If He was saving us from a place called hell, why did he not say that?

Salvation is ontological not judicial. Scripture is pretty clear that Christ died and rose to defeat Satan and sin. So that we can live an abundant, joyful life with as little sin as possible. Sin brings sadness and death.

And we get to grow more Christlike and spend eternity with God.

Gospel means good news.

Quote:

---

Salvation is ontological not judicial. Scripture is pretty clear that Christ died and rose to defeat Satan and sin. So that we can live an abundant, joyful life with as little sin as possible. Sin brings sadness and death.

---

Can it not be both? I agree that victory over Satan is one aspect of Christ's death, but are you denying that it was the propitiation of our sins?

Mostly Peaceful said:

---

Quote:

---

Salvation is ontological not judicial. Scripture is pretty clear that Christ died and rose to defeat Satan and sin. So that we can live an abundant, joyful life with as little sin as possible. Sin brings sadness and death.

---

Can it not be both? I agree that victory over Satan is one aspect of Christ's death, but are you denying that it was the propitiation of our sins?

---

Not at all. That is Scriptural. I think it is probably a combo of the two. I think the atonement was much more powerful and broader in scope than we can realize.

Quote:

---

I can't have this discussion right now, I'm sorry. It's so plainly obvious to me that God does not love everyone in the same way, just as I know you do not love everyone the same. His children are loved differently than those who are not.

---

Zobel said:

---

Quote:

---

I can't have this discussion right now, I'm sorry. It's so plainly obvious to me that God does not love everyone in the same way, just as I know you do not love everyone the same. His children are loved differently than those who are not.

---

---

I believe God loves all people equally. He created them in His image.

Reminds me of a book I have read twice

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

Do you have a link?

---

To what?

---

To Paul Washer's sermon or lecture or whatever it was.

---

Just google Paul Washer's quotes on hell. Numerous links including full sermons.

And if anyone can find any sermons in the NT that are similar or echo this theology, please inform me. Where did this theology come from?

---

The specific quote you posted to start this thread is shocking but the whole sermon is very good.

---

I will have to listen to the whole thing. Thanks.

Read the pdf and he and I have have completely different theologies His is very fear and wrath based, mine is love based. He is penal substitutionary atonement. I am Christus Victor. He believes in a judicial salvation. I believe in an ontological one. Would not want my kids or grand kids to listen to his sermons. Very wary of any fear based theology. Do not think it is Biblical.
Am sure he is sincere, just different theologies/soteriologies.

The difference is I do not think he is going to hell for our differences in theology. I bet he thinks I am. Thank God no man can scare or send anyone to hell.
And this sounds nothing like the sermons in the New Testament I have read.
I would love to ask him the question of where in Scripture it states that Jesus came to save us from hell.

---

Well the person who spoke of Hell most in the NT was Jesus and He didn't mince His words.

---

This is probably one of the top statements I hear about Jesus that I disagree with completely. Hell, when described by most Protestants, is literally the most horrific thing in existence ever. So why didn't Jesus who has the deepest possible knowledge of hell, because he is God, speak exclusively about hell 24/7 and go deep describing it in painstaking detail so people would run screaming back to God like their hair is on fire (cause it will be some day right)?. If I remember my Biblical trivia correctly, Jesus spoke more about money than any other subject but I could be wrong. Never the less, eternal torment would probably be #1 subject that Jesus should have covered during those years on earth. I would have to say that the hellfire preacher that is always outside Kyle Field before Aggie games spends more time pleading with people to repent or burn than Jesus did.

gordo97 said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

Do you have a link?

---

To what?

---

To Paul Washer's sermon or lecture or whatever it was.

---

Just google Paul Washer's quotes on hell. Numerous links including full sermons.

And if anyone can find any sermons in the NT that are similar or echo this theology, please inform me. Where did this theology come from?

---

The specific quote you posted to start this thread is shocking but the whole sermon is very good.

---

I will have to listen to the whole thing. Thanks.

Read the pdf and he and I have have completely different theologies His is very fear and wrath based, mine is love based. He is penal substitutionary atonement. I am Christus Victor. He believes in a judicial salvation. I believe in an ontological one. Would not want my kids or grand kids to listen to his sermons. Very wary of any fear based theology. Do not think it is Biblical.
Am sure he is sincere, just different theologies/soteriologies.

The difference is I do not think he is going to hell for our differences in theology. I bet he thinks I am. Thank God no man can scare or send anyone to hell.
And this sounds nothing like the sermons in the New Testament I have read.
I would love to ask him the question of where in Scripture it states that Jesus came to save us from hell.

---

Well the person who spoke of Hell most in the NT was Jesus and He didn't mince His words.

---

This is probably one of the top statements I hear about Jesus that I disagree with completely. Hell, when described by most Protestants, is literally the most horrific thing in existence ever. So why didn't Jesus who has the deepest possible knowledge of hell, because he is God, speak exclusively about hell 24/7 and go deep describing it in painstaking detail so people would run screaming back to God like their hair is on fire (cause it will be some day right)?. If I remember my Biblical trivia correctly, Jesus spoke more about money than any other subject but I could be wrong. Never the less, eternal torment would probably be #1 subject that Jesus should have covered during those years on earth. I would have to say that the hellfire preacher that is always outside Kyle Field before Aggie games spends more time pleading with people to repent or burn than Jesus did.

---

And why didn't Paul, the great evangelist ever, never mention hell? You would think that would be the most important part of his preaching if it really existed as eternal torment.

Why didn't Jesus, Paul, or any NT writers ever say that Jesus came to save us from hell and eternal torment? Seems like the biggest deal in the whole Gospel.

Read Paul's sermon on Mars Hill and compare it to what Washer, Lawson, the guys outside of Kyle, and other infernalists preach.

Paul was much more effective in my opinion.

6 times Jesus mentioned the phrase "weeping and gnashing of teeth."
Wonder if there is any significance with that number, 6, being used?

10andBOUNCE said:

---

6 times Jesus mentioned the phrase "weeping and gnashing of teeth."
Wonder if there is any significance with that number, 6, being used?

---

To me, weeping and gnashing of teeth is a sign of personal remorse due to realization of how wrong you were.

It certainly does not seem to be associated with an external entity actively punishing anyone.

Self induced.

Here is a cross reference to the stoning of Stephen.

Acts 7:54
When the members of the Sanhedrin heard this, they were furious and gnashed their teeth at him.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Here is a cross reference to the stoning of Stephen.

Acts 7:54
When the members of the Sanhedrin heard this, they were furious and gnashed their teeth at him.

---

Evidently that was a commonly used idiom in Biblical times to express anger. But no entity was punishing them. They were just mad.

Right, you are equating it with remorse versus anger. Not saying it cannot be used for both, but just putting it out there.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Right, you are equating it with remorse versus anger. Not saying it cannot be used for both, but just putting it out there.

---

I know when I have messed up, I have both remorse and anger at myself.

Yeah, I buy the idea that it is both as well.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Yeah, I buy the idea that it is both as well.

---

What is fascinating to me is that these people will express remorse and anger even though they are ostensibly by some theologies totally depraved and spiritually dead. Makes no sense unless, like I, you believe in post mortem regeneration.

gordo97 said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

lobopride said:

---

Do you have a link?

---

To what?

---

To Paul Washer's sermon or lecture or whatever it was.

---

Just google Paul Washer's quotes on hell. Numerous links including full sermons.

And if anyone can find any sermons in the NT that are similar or echo this theology, please inform me. Where did this theology come from?

---

The specific quote you posted to start this thread is shocking but the whole sermon is very good.

---

I will have to listen to the whole thing. Thanks.

Read the pdf and he and I have have completely different theologies His is very fear and wrath based, mine is love based. He is penal substitutionary atonement. I am Christus Victor. He believes in a judicial salvation. I believe in an ontological one. Would not want my kids or grand kids to listen to his sermons. Very wary of any fear based theology. Do not think it is Biblical.
Am sure he is sincere, just different theologies/soteriologies.

The difference is I do not think he is going to hell for our differences in theology. I bet he thinks I am. Thank God no man can scare or send anyone to hell.
And this sounds nothing like the sermons in the New Testament I have read.
I would love to ask him the question of where in Scripture it states that Jesus came to save us from hell.

---

Well the person who spoke of Hell most in the NT was Jesus and He didn't mince His words.

---

This is probably one of the top statements I hear about Jesus that I disagree with completely. Hell, when described by most Protestants, is literally the most horrific thing in existence ever. So why didn't Jesus who has the deepest possible knowledge of hell, because he is God, speak exclusively about hell 24/7 and go deep describing it in painstaking detail so people would run screaming back to God like their hair is on fire (cause it will be some day right)?. If I remember my Biblical trivia correctly, Jesus spoke more about money than any other subject but I could be wrong. Never the less, eternal torment would probably be #1 subject that Jesus should have covered during those years on earth. I would have to say that the hellfire preacher that is always outside Kyle Field before Aggie games spends more time pleading with people to repent or burn than Jesus did.

---

0nly 1-2% of Scripture are about hell in any fashion. And it is probably less than that as the OT use of the word hell is factually untrue. The Jews had no concept of hell so the Scripture writers would never have used that concept.

Young's Literal translation, considered one of the most accurate translations, never mentions hell.

On the other hand, there are over 300 verses on the poor.

Pretty striking as far as emphasis.

Maybe street preachers should be yelling "Feed the poor" "Be generous with your money" "Help widows and orphans" "Visit prisoners and the sick" "Take care of your family" "Love God" "Love your neighbor".

Instead of "Turn or burn". "You are on the road to eternal torment".

Seems clear from Scripture to me.

I don't disagree. If you tell me Paul Washer or Steve Lawson have preached too much on damnation versus those other things, I will likely agree with you, that it is an over-emphasis. I buy into the concept of mirroring the emphasis seen in scripture, as you mentioned.

But I do think the entire picture should be preached.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

I don't disagree. If you tell me Paul Washer or Steve Lawson have preached too much on damnation versus those other things, I will likely agree with you, that it is an over-emphasis. I buy into the concept of mirroring the emphasis seen in scripture, as you mentioned.

But I do think the entire picture should be preached.

---

To me, the problem is the whole approach is wrong. It is all based on a judicial judgement based on a concept of it all be about "going" to "heaven" or "hell".
Once I realized it was not judicial and ontological, it completely changed my thought process. I repented or changed my mind (which is what repentance means in the original Greek). And it took all the tension out of Scripture.

Salvation is an ongoing process where we become more Christlike via theosis/sanctification. It is about being saved from sin as a process.

As mentioned above, the cross has already satisfied God's wrath. Sin and Satan have been defeated.

All we have to do is accept the gift of grace through faith and work synergistically with the Spirit to become more Christlike and produce fruit.

It is not about this person is going to hell and this person is going to heaven (and what actually heaven is is a totally different topic) based on saying the sinner's prayer, responding to an altar call, or whatever. And I do not believe is Biblical. .

It is about being born again, regenerated, with a changed mind (repentance).

When Jesus says we must be "perfect", the actual Greek is better translated as "whole". And that is what this process is. With help of the Spirit we are made whole.

dermdoc said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

I don't disagree. If you tell me Paul Washer or Steve Lawson have preached too much on damnation versus those other things, I will likely agree with you, that it is an over-emphasis. I buy into the concept of mirroring the emphasis seen in scripture, as you mentioned.

But I do think the entire picture should be preached.

---

To me, the problem is the whole approach is wrong. It is all based on a judicial judgement based on a concept of it all be about "going" to "heaven" or "hell".
Once I realized it was not judicial and ontological, it completely changed my thought process. I repented or changed my mind (which is what repentance means in the original Greek). And it took all the tension out of Scripture.

Salvation is an ongoing process where we become more Christlike via theosis/sanctification. It is about being saved from sin as a process.

As mentioned above, the cross has already satisfied God's wrath. Sin and Satan have been defeated.

All we have to do is accept the gift of grace through faith and work synergistically with the Spirit to become more Christlike and produce fruit.

It is not about this person is going to hell and this person is going to heaven (and what actually heaven is is a totally different topic) based on saying the sinner's prayer, responding to an altar call, or whatever. And I do not believe is Biblical. .

It is about being born again, regenerated, with a changed mind (repentance).

When Jesus says we must be "perfect", the actual Greek is better translated as "whole". And that is what this process is. With help of the Spirit we are made whole.

---

Can't disagree with what you said, but my question is: what happens to the person who doesn't accept Jesus' free gift? You said the cross satisfied God's wrath but I believe that to only be the case for those who are in Christ. So, if not in Christ, what happens? How is God's wrath against that person satisfied?

The other problem with what Washer and Lawson are preaching is nowhere in the Bible.
No Scripture about heaven and the saints cheering people going to hell or God in hell actively torturing people.
And they are preaching this to children. No way I expose my family to that stuff.

I tend to agree with your take on the excerpt from Washer. As I mentioned before, I would most definitely be asking for some clarification, at the very least.

However, we will continue to disagree with salvation being an ongoing process. Salvation =/= sanctification. We are justified and saved, clothed with Christ's righteousness all in a single act. We don't need to continue to be saved day by day. We need to repent and continue to be obedient in our pursuit of holiness.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

I tend to agree with your take on the excerpt from Washer. As I mentioned before, I would most definitely be asking for some clarification, at the very least.

However, we will continue to disagree with salvation being an ongoing process. Salvation =/= sanctification. We are justified and saved, clothed with Christ's righteousness all in a single act. We don't need to continue to be saved day by day. We need to repent and continue to be obedient in our pursuit of holiness.

---

That is not what I am saying. Sure you are justified and saved by God's grace and our faith. But salvation to me means so much more than that. We are safe from God's wrath but we continue our "salvation" through synergism with the Holy Spirit through sanctification/theosis.

I look at it as I have been saved, I am being saved, and I will be saved.

The difference is that you are looking at this judicially and I am looking at it ontologically.

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

I don't disagree. If you tell me Paul Washer or Steve Lawson have preached too much on damnation versus those other things, I will likely agree with you, that it is an over-emphasis. I buy into the concept of mirroring the emphasis seen in scripture, as you mentioned.

But I do think the entire picture should be preached.

---

To me, the problem is the whole approach is wrong. It is all based on a judicial judgement based on a concept of it all be about "going" to "heaven" or "hell".
Once I realized it was not judicial and ontological, it completely changed my thought process. I repented or changed my mind (which is what repentance means in the original Greek). And it took all the tension out of Scripture.

Salvation is an ongoing process where we become more Christlike via theosis/sanctification. It is about being saved from sin as a process.

As mentioned above, the cross has already satisfied God's wrath. Sin and Satan have been defeated.

All we have to do is accept the gift of grace through faith and work synergistically with the Spirit to become more Christlike and produce fruit.

It is not about this person is going to hell and this person is going to heaven (and what actually heaven is is a totally different topic) based on saying the sinner's prayer, responding to an altar call, or whatever. And I do not believe is Biblical. .

It is about being born again, regenerated, with a changed mind (repentance).

When Jesus says we must be "perfect", the actual Greek is better translated as "whole". And that is what this process is. With help of the Spirit we are made whole.

---

Can't disagree with what you said, but my question is: what happens to the person who doesn't accept Jesus' free gift? You said the cross satisfied God's wrath but I believe that to only be the case for those who are in Christ. So, if not in Christ, what happens? How is God's wrath against that person satisfied?

---

What does Scripture say? John 3:16 uses the word perish. Numerous other Scriptures state eternal destruction not punishment. The only Scripture I know that explicitly states eternal punishment (not destruction) is Matthew 25 46 which we have already discussed. Just to repeat, the Greek work used in this verse for punishment, kolasis, is usually interpreted as a pruning or rehabilitative punishment. Young's Literal Translation uses the word "chastening". Timoria is the Greek word for vindictive punishment,

And there is a huge debate on whether aionios means eternal or of an age.

And of course, there are universal Scriptures also and we have discussed those as well

I would say the majority of Scripture support's annihilationism with ultimate reconciliation second. I firmly believe there is less Scriptural basis for ECT hell than any of the other theories.

To sum it up, I do not know for sure. But neither do Washer or Lawson. And they are frankly preaching non Biblically based stuff. To children. That sickens me.

dermdoc said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

I tend to agree with your take on the excerpt from Washer. As I mentioned before, I would most definitely be asking for some clarification, at the very least.

However, we will continue to disagree with salvation being an ongoing process. Salvation =/= sanctification. We are justified and saved, clothed with Christ's righteousness all in a single act. We don't need to continue to be saved day by day. We need to repent and continue to be obedient in our pursuit of holiness.

---

The difference is that you are looking at this judicially and I am looking at it ontologically.

---

I agree this is the root of the disagreement.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

I tend to agree with your take on the excerpt from Washer. As I mentioned before, I would most definitely be asking for some clarification, at the very least.

However, we will continue to disagree with salvation being an ongoing process. Salvation =/= sanctification. We are justified and saved, clothed with Christ's righteousness all in a single act. We don't need to continue to be saved day by day. We need to repent and continue to be obedient in our pursuit of holiness.

---

The difference is that you are looking at this judicially and I am looking at it ontologically.

---

I agree this is the root of the disagreement.

---

Yep. I used to think judicially and it made no sense to me Scripturally. Lots of Scripture in tension. Once I repented and changed my mind, it all came clear to me.