Redstone said:

---

To return to my points above about mystery, and the "meta" Bible issue - only Jesus Christ is the word of God ….

Please remember plenty of Church fathers disagreed about essential matters

https://yankeeathonite.substack.com/p/everywhere-always-by-all

And my personal annoyance, some essential Catholics kept out very justifiable and even essential writings from the canon, ie Augustine
(Check out the Alberino version of Book of Enoch, kindle)

So, on such issues, it's very messy. But what we can say is that the argument for hell being real and crowded is formidable and ancient, AND only using the canon would not be what those closest to Christ would have done. Instead, what does the DEPOSITS of faith indicate? Canon, after all, is from oral tradition.

Read with the Apostolic Church.

---

Mostly Peaceful said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

I am a Calvinist even though I wish God would save everybody. I feel constrained by what I understand the Bible teaches. I'm not here to argue that point. In contrast, I don't have a strong position on ECT hell.

The thing is, I think it's dangerous to choose what to believe based on how we wish things were. Annhialationism, universalism, and no-ECT hell positions seem more palatable to me, but I don't want to deceive myself. I want to know and act according to the truth as best I can, no matter how uncomfortable it may be.

---

With all due respect, what Scripture supports ECT hell?

To my knowledge, the only Scripture that supports eternal punishment, not eternal fire or destruction, is Matthew 25 46. And the original Greek uses the word kolasis which is translated as punishment although it is usually translated as a pruning or corrective punishment. Timoria is the Greek word for retributive punishment.

And of course, there is a ton of debate on translating anion into eternal rather than of an age like Young's literal translation does.

There is a whole lot more Scriptural support for annihilationism and ultimate reconciliation than ECT hell.

But I know I will not change anyone's mind. To me, it is all about the character of God. As revealed through Christ and His sacrifice for us.

A lot of ECT thinking comes from belief in penal substitutionary atonement which is fairly recent in Christian theology. This is where the wrathful, angry God comes from.

Christus victor/ransom/recapitulation theory of atonement seems to be the predominant view of the early church.

---

That was not my point. I need to study this more to reach a conclusion.

I do think it is sometimes easy to let what we want to be true to influence our conclusions. For example, I have a family member who ignores clear scripture because "the God she believes in would not do that or be that way." That god is a being of her own creation. I don't want to fall into that trap.

---

I completely agree. I am basing my beliefs on Scripture. Not what I want to believe. You can research it just like I have.

To my knowledge, there is only one Scripture that mentions eternal punishment, Matthew 25 46. And the interpretation, as I mentioned above, is not as clear cut as people think.

If I am wrong, someone please correct me.

And I got into this again and apologize. I do not know what the topics of election, foreknowledge, and predestination have to do with this thread.

Or a discussion of modern/progressive Christianity when it is not even defined.

I will watch baseball for a while. Sorry.

---

In addition to Matthew 25:46, the rich man and Lazarus supports eternal punishment. "Everlasting destruction" in 2 Thess. 1:8-10 can be interpreted as eternal punishment just as easily as annihilationism. Rev. 14:11 says, "And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name."

I'm not very familiar with St. Gregory, but eternal punishment was the predominate view of the early church fathers. Polycarp, for example, just before being martyred said, "You threaten me with fire which burns for an hour, and is then extinguished, but you know nothing of the fire of the coming judgment and eternal punishment, reserved for the ungodly."

While I believe there is just as much evidence for eternal punishment as there is any other view of hell, I question anyone who says they know with any certainty with hell is. All I know is that however it works, God is just. Eternal punishment in no way makes me question His character.

---

dermdoc said:

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

I am a Calvinist even though I wish God would save everybody. I feel constrained by what I understand the Bible teaches. I'm not here to argue that point. In contrast, I don't have a strong position on ECT hell.

The thing is, I think it's dangerous to choose what to believe based on how we wish things were. Annhialationism, universalism, and no-ECT hell positions seem more palatable to me, but I don't want to deceive myself. I want to know and act according to the truth as best I can, no matter how uncomfortable it may be.

---

With all due respect, what Scripture supports ECT hell?

To my knowledge, the only Scripture that supports eternal punishment, not eternal fire or destruction, is Matthew 25 46. And the original Greek uses the word kolasis which is translated as punishment although it is usually translated as a pruning or corrective punishment. Timoria is the Greek word for retributive punishment.

And of course, there is a ton of debate on translating anion into eternal rather than of an age like Young's literal translation does.

There is a whole lot more Scriptural support for annihilationism and ultimate reconciliation than ECT hell.

But I know I will not change anyone's mind. To me, it is all about the character of God. As revealed through Christ and His sacrifice for us.

A lot of ECT thinking comes from belief in penal substitutionary atonement which is fairly recent in Christian theology. This is where the wrathful, angry God comes from.

Christus victor/ransom/recapitulation theory of atonement seems to be the predominant view of the early church.

---

That was not my point. I need to study this more to reach a conclusion.

I do think it is sometimes easy to let what we want to be true to influence our conclusions. For example, I have a family member who ignores clear scripture because "the God she believes in would not do that or be that way." That god is a being of her own creation. I don't want to fall into that trap.

---

I completely agree. I am basing my beliefs on Scripture. Not what I want to believe. You can research it just like I have.

To my knowledge, there is only one Scripture that mentions eternal punishment, Matthew 25 46. And the interpretation, as I mentioned above, is not as clear cut as people think.

If I am wrong, someone please correct me.

And I got into this again and apologize. I do not know what the topics of election, foreknowledge, and predestination have to do with this thread.

Or a discussion of modern/progressive Christianity when it is not even defined.

I will watch baseball for a while. Sorry.

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

I am a Calvinist even though I wish God would save everybody. I feel constrained by what I understand the Bible teaches. I'm not here to argue that point. In contrast, I don't have a strong position on ECT hell.

The thing is, I think it's dangerous to choose what to believe based on how we wish things were. Annhialationism, universalism, and no-ECT hell positions seem more palatable to me, but I don't want to deceive myself. I want to know and act according to the truth as best I can, no matter how uncomfortable it may be.

---

With all due respect, what Scripture supports ECT hell?

To my knowledge, the only Scripture that supports eternal punishment, not eternal fire or destruction, is Matthew 25 46. And the original Greek uses the word kolasis which is translated as punishment although it is usually translated as a pruning or corrective punishment. Timoria is the Greek word for retributive punishment.

And of course, there is a ton of debate on translating anion into eternal rather than of an age like Young's literal translation does.

There is a whole lot more Scriptural support for annihilationism and ultimate reconciliation than ECT hell.

But I know I will not change anyone's mind. To me, it is all about the character of God. As revealed through Christ and His sacrifice for us.

A lot of ECT thinking comes from belief in penal substitutionary atonement which is fairly recent in Christian theology. This is where the wrathful, angry God comes from.

Christus victor/ransom/recapitulation theory of atonement seems to be the predominant view of the early church.

---

That was not my point. I need to study this more to reach a conclusion.

I do think it is sometimes easy to let what we want to be true to influence our conclusions. For example, I have a family member who ignores clear scripture because "the God she believes in would not do that or be that way." That god is a being of her own creation. I don't want to fall into that trap.

---

I completely agree. I am basing my beliefs on Scripture. Not what I want to believe. You can research it just like I have.

To my knowledge, there is only one Scripture that mentions eternal punishment, Matthew 25 46. And the interpretation, as I mentioned above, is not as clear cut as people think.

If I am wrong, someone please correct me.

And I got into this again and apologize. I do not know what the topics of election, foreknowledge, and predestination have to do with this thread.

Or a discussion of modern/progressive Christianity when it is not even defined.

I will watch baseball for a while. Sorry.

---

I'll say that Arminianism, universalism, and annihilationism all are very comfortable views to me. Therefore, they worry me because I don't want to subscribe to them unless I can truly justify such a position. I also don't want to reject them on that basis. Again, it comes down to a desire to not be deceived.

---

dermdoc said:

---

And if saints can disagree on the concept of hell, so can we my friend.

---

Redstone said:

---

I want to reiterate it may be possible to learn what hell and heaven are like. (I'd argue heavens, but…)

I'm a Fortean, meaning the mysterious can be better understood by pattern recognition (among other methods, but this is first)

Objective realities can be reached for through the subjective experiences of honest, though obviously flawed, people ….

Or, objective truths via subjective experiences

For example, how many DMT trippers, in a group, have described the "same" trip and entities - like the blindfolded describing feeling an elephant, different yet "the same"? Many cases.

I'd start with a great Christian lady, Julie, Touching the Afterlife

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3eU442v2TUqfRoTYeetzpg

Book and then various video recommendation: Howard Storm, My Descent Into Death

---

Mostly Peaceful said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

And if saints can disagree on the concept of hell, so can we my friend.

---

Could not agree more. And just to be clear, I don't necessarily disagree with your view. I just can't take eternal punishment off the table.

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

I am a Calvinist even though I wish God would save everybody. I feel constrained by what I understand the Bible teaches. I'm not here to argue that point. In contrast, I don't have a strong position on ECT hell.

The thing is, I think it's dangerous to choose what to believe based on how we wish things were. Annhialationism, universalism, and no-ECT hell positions seem more palatable to me, but I don't want to deceive myself. I want to know and act according to the truth as best I can, no matter how uncomfortable it may be.

---

With all due respect, what Scripture supports ECT hell?

To my knowledge, the only Scripture that supports eternal punishment, not eternal fire or destruction, is Matthew 25 46. And the original Greek uses the word kolasis which is translated as punishment although it is usually translated as a pruning or corrective punishment. Timoria is the Greek word for retributive punishment.

And of course, there is a ton of debate on translating anion into eternal rather than of an age like Young's literal translation does.

There is a whole lot more Scriptural support for annihilationism and ultimate reconciliation than ECT hell.

But I know I will not change anyone's mind. To me, it is all about the character of God. As revealed through Christ and His sacrifice for us.

A lot of ECT thinking comes from belief in penal substitutionary atonement which is fairly recent in Christian theology. This is where the wrathful, angry God comes from.

Christus victor/ransom/recapitulation theory of atonement seems to be the predominant view of the early church.

---

That was not my point. I need to study this more to reach a conclusion.

I do think it is sometimes easy to let what we want to be true to influence our conclusions. For example, I have a family member who ignores clear scripture because "the God she believes in would not do that or be that way." That god is a being of her own creation. I don't want to fall into that trap.

---

I completely agree. I am basing my beliefs on Scripture. Not what I want to believe. You can research it just like I have.

To my knowledge, there is only one Scripture that mentions eternal punishment, Matthew 25 46. And the interpretation, as I mentioned above, is not as clear cut as people think.

If I am wrong, someone please correct me.

And I got into this again and apologize. I do not know what the topics of election, foreknowledge, and predestination have to do with this thread.

Or a discussion of modern/progressive Christianity when it is not even defined.

I will watch baseball for a while. Sorry.

---

I would say the greatest scriptural support is Christ himself speaking of unquenchable fire and that it'd be better not to have been born than go to hell, which only makes sense if it's an eternal destination.

I will say that I forget which Orthodox bishop said it, but "hope for universal salvation, but live like your eternal salvation depends on it" or something along those lines makes sense

---

dermdoc said:

---

So you would punish your children eternally with fire, gruesome tortures, etc. because they sinned against you?

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

So you would punish your children eternally with fire, gruesome tortures, etc. because they sinned against you?

---

No because I am not God. A crime against me is no where close to a sin against God.

---

dermdoc said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

So you would punish your children eternally with fire, gruesome tortures, etc. because they sinned against you?

---

No because I am not God. A crime against me is no where close to a sin against God.

---

But God is your Father.

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

So you would punish your children eternally with fire, gruesome tortures, etc. because they sinned against you?

---

No because I am not God. A crime against me is no where close to a sin against God.

---

But God is your Father.

---

Of course He is. He is also my judge.

---

dermdoc said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

Forgive me if this has already been addressed Doc, but when he writes, "the soul gets used to being in a body" does not that sound like Gnosticism wherein the soul is trapped in a body?

---

I don't agree with everything he says but believe his general concept of "hell" is correct.

If God creates a human and ultimately does not refine His creation, seems like a non Sovereign God to me.

---

dermdoc said:

---

This was part of my reading this am and thought it was applicable to this discussion.

Luke 11 11-13

Which of you fathers, if your son ask for a fish, will give him a snake instead
Or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion?
If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?

Our God is a loving Father indeed.

---

dermdoc said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Agree. And I believe God's presence is "Hell" at firsr for those who reject Him but ultimately all will be made new. God wins.

---

How do you square that with the Gospel passage that says it would have been better had Judas not been born?

---

His refinement will be longer and more severe is how I see it. You may differ.

---

I do differ, but enjoy the conversation. Given that a person will eventually end up in the presence of Christ, regardless of the time of refinement; how could it be better that they were never born?

---

I do not know the answer. I just pray for mercy for all.

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

This was part of my reading this am and thought it was applicable to this discussion.

Luke 11 11-13

Which of you fathers, if your son ask for a fish, will give him a snake instead
Or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion?
If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?

Our God is a loving Father indeed.

---

To His children, yes.

---

ttu_85 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

Forgive me if this has already been addressed Doc, but when he writes, "the soul gets used to being in a body" does not that sound like Gnosticism wherein the soul is trapped in a body?

---

I don't agree with everything he says but believe his general concept of "hell" is correct.

If God creates a human and ultimately does not refine His creation, seems like a non Sovereign God to me.

---

Hey doc !

Interesting perspective but I have several questions:

1. Was God's objective, when creating Adam and Eve, to create a refined more perfect being or one with Free Will and choices ?

2. If the latter, would that make him any less Sovereign ?

---

dermdoc said:

---

I pray for mercy for all and let God decide.

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

I pray for mercy for all and let God decide.

---

Welcome to reformed theology

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

I appreciate your desire to be grounded in Biblical truth, even if we are interpreting it differently.

---

Redstone said:

---

Does not fit the testimonies, meaning commonalities of the subjective experiences, of those hellish experiences chronicled by the researcher in hundreds of cases.

---