Posted on 05/28/2014 7:41:25 PM PDT by ReformationFan
Okay, here is what is written:
“And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes, 48 but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of a flogging, will receive but few. From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more.”
So here you have a slave who knew his master’s will & did not do it, & he will receive many lashes. You also have a slave who did not know the master’s will & who committed deeds worthy of a flogging, the result being that he will receive a much lighter punishment than the first slave.
That’s what is written. It doesn’t fit in with annihilation at all. There’s no indication that the first slave will be lashed to death. Certainly the second won’t. In fact, this picture of judgment, painted by Jesus Himself, excludes annihilation as an option. I.e.: there’s no indication that the floggings, or the punishment they represent, will precede a death sentence.
You don’t have to go beyond what is written to see that the Bible does not support the annihilation theory.
Also, why, under Calvinism, would one damned/unelected individual be deemed far more culpable than another? Is that not in and of itself incompatible with Calvinism?
Most But more importantly, the Bible teaches otherwise. Nevertheless, the opposite of Life is Death, not eternal torment. You would have me believe someone kept alive for eternal torment with an imperishable, ever renewing immortal body does not possess life. You have to develop and accept an odd interpretation of the word "Life", not me.
"QUOTE: [Btw, ‘annihilation’ didn’t arise as a doctrine/belief until around the same time as Calvin. It has not always been even a minority view.]
Perhaps you should read Ignatius of Antioch's Epistle to the Magnesians, Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho (chapter 5) and Irenaeus: Against Heresies: Book II, Chapter 34. Or especially Arnobius, Against the Heathen (Book II, paragraph 61). They all predated the reformation, if I'm not mistaken.
‘QUOTE: If you believe the righteous will enjoy eternal heaven, how can you not believe the damned will similarly be in eternal torment?’
“Most But more importantly, the Bible teaches otherwise. Nevertheless, the opposite of Life is Death, not eternal torment. You would have me believe someone kept alive for eternal torment with an imperishable, ever renewing immortal body does not possess life. You have to develop and accept an odd interpretation of the word “Life”, not me.”
So you’re saying an eternal reward/life lasts forever, but an “eternal punishment” lasts how long? A couple of seconds? A minute? I.e.: you can’t punish a corpse. You can’t punish something that’s no longer there. So according to you, ‘eternal’ in the first usage means ‘forever’ & in the second means, ‘however long it takes for a soul to die in the lake of fire’. Correct?
If you have any quotes re: annihilation you’d like to share, I will read each & every one. I do not, as a simple practicality, have time to ferret out whatever references you have in mind. [I barely have time for the present exchange, but I will reply as time permits. There may be gaps in my response times here & there. But I will gladly stick with the discussion as long as it can be conducted in a polite & responsive manner.]
First of all, I am not defending Calvin, nor am I a Calvinist per se. And regardless of your take on annihilation, EVERYONE whose name is not written in the Book of Life is cast into the Lake of Fire, regardless of the severity of their sins!
QUOTE: Calvin’s god was a Sadistic monster. It wasn’t incumbent upon him to create souls for no other purpose than to torment them eternally in hell.
Incidentally, you God creates souls knowing full well the majority will be tormented eternally in the Lake of Fire. How is that any different?
You also quote 2 Pet. 3:9 "The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.”
Interesting choice. What does PERISH mean, tormented forever?
I need to modify my suggestions as to how long ‘eternal punishment’ can last for annihilationists. I just remembered the ‘weeping & gnashing of teeth’. There are numerous, numerous references to both, but I will quote one only:
“Throw out the worthless slave into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
Matthew 25:30
So under the annihilation theory, when does the weeping & gnashing of teeth occur? I’ll have to check the Greek as time permits, but depending on the form of verb, it may well indicate an ongoing phenomenon. If so, it would indicate an indefinite period of weeping & teeth gnashing. I’ll plan to check as soon as I can find sufficient time.
‘First of all, I am not defending Calvin, nor am I a Calvinist per se. And regardless of your take on annihilation, EVERYONE whose name is not written in the Book of Life is cast into the Lake of Fire, regardless of the severity of their sins!’
First of all, you need to reconcile the Revelation image with all the rest of Scripture. Not all of Revelation is literal. For example, here is the Revelation description of the birth of Christ:
“12 A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; 2 and she was with child; and she *cried out, being in labor and in pain to give birth.
[The Red Dragon, Satan]
3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: and behold, a great red dragon having seven heads and ten horns, and on his heads were seven diadems. 4 And his tail *swept away a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she gave birth he might devour her child.”
snip
“13 And when the dragon saw that he was thrown down to the earth, he persecuted the woman who gave birth to the male child. 14 But the two wings of the great eagle were given to the woman, so that she could fly into the wilderness to her place, where she *was nourished for a time and times and half a time, from the presence of the serpent. 15 And the serpent poured water like a river out of his mouth after the woman, so that he might cause her to be swept away with the flood. 16 But the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened its mouth and drank up the river which the dragon poured out of his mouth.”
Do you believe that is literally what happened when Mary gave birth to Jesus? If not, why do you believe the lake of fire is literal? Revelation is written in imagery, in the Apocalyptic style. It is not all literal. You can’t say, ‘The parts that have already happened are not literal, but the parts that are yet to happen are literal’, because there is no indication whatsoever that that is the case. Rather, the entire book is Apocalyptic, & attempts to make certain parts of it completely literal is an error in interpretation.
“Incidentally, you God creates souls knowing full well the majority will be tormented eternally in the Lake of Fire. How is that any different?”
All the difference in the world. The God of the Bible gives people a choice. They can choose to accept His free gift of eternal life & live forever in heaven, or they can reject Him & suffer “eternal punishment”. If they reject Him, it’s of their own free will. They choose their destiny. Nothing could be more different than creating a sentient human, able to feel pain, agony, despair & torment, & giving that person no option but to suffer “eternal punishment”. Now *that* is Sadism.
Re: the term ‘perish’. If the Bible spelled out exactly what it means to ‘perish’ via the ‘second death’, we would not be having this discussion. But it doesn’t. It does indicate, as I quoted above, that in the ‘eternal darkness’ of damnation there will be ‘weeping & gnashing of teeth’. How can annihilated people weep? If, otoh, the ‘second death’ is eternal separation from God, the damned could both ‘perish’ in the spiritual sense & weep at the same time.
I’m about to log off for quite a while. Before I do, I want to leave you with a parable & some related thoughts. From Luke 16:
19 ‘“Now there was a rich man, and he habitually dressed in purple and fine linen, joyously living in splendor every day. 20 And a poor man named Lazarus was laid at his gate, covered with sores, 21 and longing to be fed with the crumbs which were falling from the rich man’s table; besides, even the dogs were coming and licking his sores. 22 Now the poor man died and was carried away by the angels to Abraham’s bosom; and the rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and *saw Abraham far away and Lazarus in his bosom. 24 And he cried out and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus so that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool off my tongue, for I am in agony in this flame.’ 25 But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that during your life you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus bad things; but now he is being comforted here, and you are in agony. 26 And besides all this, between us and you there is a great chasm fixed, so that those who wish to come over from here to you will not be able, and that none may cross over from there to us.’ 27 And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, that you send him to my father’s house— 28 for I have five brothers—in order that he may warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’ 29 But Abraham *said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ 30 But he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent!’ 31 But he said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.’”’
Notice that once he is in ‘this place of torment’ (in which ‘flames’ are mentioned), the rich man still acts on the basis of free will. I.e.: an eternal perspective hasn’t made a Calvinist out of him; quite the contrary; he believes his brothers are capable of repentance if they so choose.
The answer to that is so eloquent:
“‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.’”
Meaning, up to a certain point mankind had the admonitions of Moses & the Prophets. From these they could, if they chose, understand the absolute need for obedience to God & its relationship to judgment/afterlife.
Later, a ‘man rose from the dead’. Jesus. But as Abraham noted, people who refused to listen to Moses & the prophets would refuse to listen to Jesus as well.
But at least they had a choice. They were not created solely to suffer “eternal punishment”.
I don’t depend on anyone living 500 years ago for my understanding. I had believed the Doctrines of Grace for 10 years before I read the first word of Calvin and to this day I’ve never spent much time reading either Calvin or Luther. The more I studied the Scriptures, the more I saw God’s sovereignty. I was convicted over sovereignty by the plain reading of the Word of God, initially the Gospel of John, not anyone’s system. I simply can’t read John or Paul without seeing God as sovereign over all things, including the salvation of sinners. At the same time I see virtually no evidence for “free will.” Instead I read of a will that has been a slave to sin.
God bless, FRiend!
As a bonus here are some instructive quotes from Charles Spurgeon. I give them not because I get my doctrine from them, but because I’m in agreement with them. I’m also posting them because I just plain like them.
“It is no novelty, then, that I am preaching; no new doctrine. I love to proclaim these strong old doctrines that are called by nickname Calvinism, but which are truly and verily the revealed truth of God as it is in Christ Jesus.”
“I have my own opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel if we do not preach justification by faith without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing unchangeable eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross. (Charles Spurgeon, The New Park Street Pulpit, Vol. 1, 1856).”
“... and I will go as far as Martin Luther, in that strong assertion of his, where he says, ‘If any man doth ascribe of salvation, even the very least, to the free will of man, he knoweth nothing of grace, and he hath not learnt Jesus Christ aright.’ It may seem a harsh sentiment; but he who in his soul believes that man does of his own free will turn to God, cannot have been taught of God, for that is one of the first principles taught us when God begins with us, that we have neither will nor power, but that He gives both; that he is ‘Alpha and Omega’ in the salvation of men. (C.H. Spurgeon from the sermon “Free Will A Slave”, 1855).”
When I was coming to Christ, I thought I was doing it all myself, and though I sought the Lord earnestly, I had no idea the Lord was seeking me. I do not think the young convert is at first aware of this. I can recall the very day and hour when first I received those truths in my own soul - when they were as John Bunyan says, burnt into my heart as with a hot iron; and I can recollect how I felt that I had grown all of a sudden from a babe into a man - that I had made progress in scriptural knowledge, through having found, once for all, the clue to the truth of God ... I saw that God was at the bottom of it all, and that He was the Author of my faith, and so the whole doctrine of grace opened up to me, and from that doctrine I have not departed to this day, and I desire to make this my constant confession, I ascribe my change wholly to God. (Charles Spurgeon, Autobiography: 1, The Early Years, Banner of Truth, pp. 164-165).
Calvinism did not spring from Calvin. We believe that it sprang from the great Founder of all truth. (Charles Spurgeon, Sermons, Vol. 7, p. 298).
We declare on scriptural authority that the human will is so desperately set on mischief, so depraved, so inclined to everything that is evil, and so disinclined to everything that is good, that without the powerful, supernatural, irresistible influence of the Holy Spirit, no human will ever be constrained toward Christ. (Charles Spurgeon, Sermons, Vol. 4, p.139).
I do not come into this pulpit hoping that perhaps somebody will of his own free will return to Christ. My hope lies in another quarter. I hope that my Master will lay hold of some of them and say, “You are mine, and you shall be mine. I claim you for myself.” My hope arises from the freeness of grace, and not from the freedom of the will.
I believe that Christ came into the world not to put men into a salvable state, but into a saved state. Not to put them where they could save themselves, but to do the work in them and for them, from first to last. If I did not believe that there was might going forth with the word of Jesus which makes men willing, and which turns them from the error of their ways by the mighty, overwhelming, constraining force of divine influence, I should cease to glory in the cross of Christ. (C.H. Spurgeon, Sermons, Vol. 3, p. 34).
A man is not saved against his will, but he is made willing by the operation of the Holy Ghost. A mighty grace which he does not wish to resist enters into the man, disarms him, makes a new creature of him, and he is saved. (C.H. Spurgeon, Sermons, Vol. 10, p. 309).
I question whether we have preached the whole counsel of God, unless predestination with all its solemnity and sureness be continually declared. (Charles Spurgeon, Sermons, Vol. 6, p. 26).
2. You correctly stated that "... refused to listen to Moses & the prophets would refuse to listen to Jesus as well." But then, you state that "...at least they had a choice. They were not created solely to suffer “eternal punishment”.
2 problems:
a)The majority of the dead have never heard of Moses, the Prophets, or Jesus, yet their destiny is the same: Eternal torment in the Lake of Fire, as you hold.
b)In Romans, Paul explains some were created solely to be destroyed.to wit:
Roman 9:15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.
17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”
18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
And especially 9:22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?
God is Sovereign!
Taken in context (Matt 25:14-30) then, are we to conclude people are judged for eternal salvation based on how they invest their money?
Wesley preached Whitfield's funeral and toward the end these words:
3. That both these accounts are just and impartial, will readily be allowed; that is, as far as they go. But they go little farther than the outside of his character. They show you the preacher, but not the man, the Christian, the saint of God. May I be permitted to add a little on this head, from a personal knowledge of near forty years? Indeed, I am thoroughly sensible how difficult it is to speak on so delicate a subject; what prudence is required to avoid both extremes, to say neither too little nor too much! Nay, I know it is impossible to speak at all, to say either less or more, without incurring from some the former, from others the latter censure. Some will seriously think that too little is said; and others, that it is too much. But without attending to this, I will speak just what I know, before Him to whom we are all to give an account.4. Mention has already been made of his unparalleled zeal, his indefatigable activity, his tender-heartedness to the afflicted, and charitableness toward the poor. But should we not likewise mention his deep gratitude to all whom God had used as instruments of good to him? -- of whom he did not cease to speak in the most respectful manner, even to his dying day. Should we not mention, that he had a heart susceptible of the most generous and the most tender friendship? I have frequently thought that this, of all others, was the distinguishing part of his character. How few have we known of so kind a temper, of such large and flowing affections! Was it not principally by this, that the hearts of others were so strangely drawn and knit to him? Can anything but love beget love? This shone in his very countenance, and continually breathed in all his words, whether in public or private. Was it not this, which, quick and penetrating as lightning, flew from heart to heart? which gave that life to his sermons, his conversations, his letters? Ye are witnesses!
Wesley points out that their intent always had been to emphasize that all was of God, that they were preaching salvation and justification, and not just the utter sinfulness of man, but that he was dead in his trespasses and sins.
In sum, it was God's grace to which both were trying to be true.
It's the same in our day. Some brothers and sisters in Christ are standing up for God's grace the best they know how, and that is a biblical stand. Because it's biblical, they run across passages that lead to seemingly contradictory conclusions, that salvation is open to all and that salvation is limited to those selected by God.
The passages that have always been my starting point are: Ro 8:29 "those He foreknew He predestined" and Acts 16:14 "One of those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul's message."
From our perspective in time, God knows those who are to become His sheep, and even in their lives He works with them, even to the opening of their hearts to hear the gospel.
From God's perspective over time, God has always known His sheep.
Ah, now we are getting to the point. This statement suggests you do not hold that there is a destination for all unbelievers called the Lake of Fire. Do you also reject the millineum, the judgement of Satan, the New Jerusalem et al?
I will leave this parting thought:
Matt 10: 28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
Destroy means eternal torture, right? And the greek word translated "hell" here is gehenna, not hades or tartarus.
I heard a preacher describe salvation as a doorway, Jesus, and on the one side was the placard above the door that read "All who desire may enter". Once passing through the door, looking backwards, the placard above the door from the perspective of those inside read "only the chosen have passed through".
“Many are called; few are chosen.”
It's a comforting thought to know that God knew all along and had it under control.
‘1. Regarding Lazarus and the Rick Man, this parable is about the state of the dead prior to the last judgement, so it would have no bearing on the condition of those in the Lake of Fire.’
So, prior to the Day of Judgment, people are judged. Some are sent to a ‘place of torment’ while others are comforted. After that, comes the Second Judgment.
That is a remarkable interpretation. Entirely non-Biblical, but quite remarkable.
I’ll get to Pharaoh after I’ve heard your explanation of the Two Judgments.
‘The majority of the dead have never heard of Moses, the Prophets, or Jesus, yet their destiny is the same’
This is Calvin’s problem, not mine. Jesus dealt with it handily, to Calvinism’s demolition:
‘“And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes, 48 but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of a flogging, will receive but few. From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more.”’ [citation above]
‘You quoted Matthew 25:30 “Throw out the worthless slave into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”’
‘Taken in context (Matt 25:14-30) then, are we to conclude people are judged for eternal salvation based on how they invest their money?’
As it happens, we have vivid picture of judgment. I already quoted it above, but your comment appears to call for a second cite. I’ll let the Lord’s description of the basis of judgment speak for itself:
From Matthew 25:
34 “Then the King will say to those on His right, ‘Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in; 36 naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer Him, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink? 38 And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You? 39 When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ 40 The King will answer and say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.’
41 “Then He will also say to those on His left, ‘Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels; 42 for I was hungry, and you gave Me nothing to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me nothing to drink; 43 I was a stranger, and you did not invite Me in; naked, and you did not clothe Me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.’ 44 Then they themselves also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?’ 45 Then He will answer them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ 46 These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
‘If not, why do you believe the lake of fire is literal? Revelation is written in imagery, in the Apocalyptic style. It is not all literal.’
“Ah, now we are getting to the point. This statement suggests you do not hold that there is a destination for all unbelievers called the Lake of Fire. Do you also reject the millineum, the judgement of Satan, the New Jerusalem et al?”
It’s interesting the part of my reply you ignored. It was too important to ignore. Here it is a second time:
“Not all of Revelation is literal. For example, here is the Revelation description of the birth of Christ:
“12 A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; 2 and she was with child; and she *cried out, being in labor and in pain to give birth.
[The Red Dragon, Satan]
3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: and behold, a great red dragon having seven heads and ten horns, and on his heads were seven diadems. 4 And his tail *swept away a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she gave birth he might devour her child.”
snip
“13 And when the dragon saw that he was thrown down to the earth, he persecuted the woman who gave birth to the male child. 14 But the two wings of the great eagle were given to the woman, so that she could fly into the wilderness to her place, where she *was nourished for a time and times and half a time, from the presence of the serpent. 15 And the serpent poured water like a river out of his mouth after the woman, so that he might cause her to be swept away with the flood. 16 But the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened its mouth and drank up the river which the dragon poured out of his mouth.”
Do you believe that is literally what happened when Mary gave birth to Jesus?”
Since you believe this is the “heart of the matter”, let’s agree it’s important. So I will wait, however long it takes, for you to answer the question. I.e.: do you believe all of the above, plus the in-between vss I didn’t cite, happened *literally* when Mary gave birth to the Christ?
Those are merely nicknames given by men. If you believe belief in God’s sovereignty in salvation started with Calvin you are mistaken. It was taught by the apostles and Christ Himself. It was believed and taught by people throughout history. Long before Calvin took his first gulp of air, Rome was murdering people who believe as I believe. It’s silly to pretend it’s an innovation of the 16th century. Saying it can never make it so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.