Memento Mori. Testament to a false doctrine – there is no such thing as Hellfire.

originally posted by: rounda

So if you agree that Young's translation can be incorrect, why do you insist on using it as the basis for your argument? It's literally the only one you've quoted, and I'm assuming that's because it's the one that supports your narrative.

What's unfair? That you're changing the narrative of the bible and someone is calling you out on it, and even using the same translation you're quoting to show you why it's wrong?

I believe the YLT is LESS incorrect than the KJV, but my research to prove the non-existence of "hell" was done in the KJV, with only a look or two at the YLT. So, no, I do NOT insist on using it as the basis of my argument. This only shows how little you comprehend of my argument. I can easily provide you with a list of DOZENS of Bible translations which do not contain the word "hell." They all support my "narrative."

The narrative of the Bible was changed centuries ago around the time of Constantine and the Nicene Creed - people like me are correcting the narrative. If you call me out on it, you may be misunderstanding the whole issue.

originally posted by: Lazarus Short

originally posted by: rounda

So if you agree that Young's translation can be incorrect, why do you insist on using it as the basis for your argument? It's literally the only one you've quoted, and I'm assuming that's because it's the one that supports your narrative.

What's unfair? That you're changing the narrative of the bible and someone is calling you out on it, and even using the same translation you're quoting to show you why it's wrong?

I believe the YLT is LESS incorrect than the KJV, but my research to prove the non-existence of "hell" was done in the KJV, with only a look or two at the YLT. So, no, I do NOT insist on using it as the basis of my argument. This only shows how little you comprehend of my argument. I can easily provide you with a list of DOZENS of Bible translations which do not contain the word "hell." They all support my "narrative."

The narrative of the Bible was changed centuries ago around the time of Constantine and the Nicene Creed - people like me are correcting the narrative. If you call me out on it, you may be misunderstanding the whole issue.

Wait...

So you used the KJV to determine there is no hell, even though the KJV says there is eternal torment, fire, etc in hell...

But you quote the YLT to push your point, and think its more accurate, even though it says god isn't eternal, which is about as inaccurate as it gets?

Please do provide that list of dozens of translations that support your narrative, because basically every translation used in pretty much every denominational church disagrees with you.

I mean, I feel like God would want the most accurate translation to be delivered to the masses... I wonder why YLT never caught on?

originally posted by: rounda

Wait...

So you used the KJV to determine there is no hell, even though the KJV says there is eternal torment, fire, etc in hell...

But you quote the YLT to push your point, and think its more accurate, even though it says god isn't eternal, which is about as inaccurate as it gets?

Please do provide that list of dozens of translations that support your narrative, because basically every translation used in pretty much every denominational church disagrees with you.

I mean, I feel like God would want the most accurate translation to be delivered to the masses... I wonder why YLT never caught on?

But wait, there's more! Much more...

I used the KJV because I was familiar with it [yes, I once believed in "hell" and ECT in it] and because I figured if I could disprove "hell" there, it would be more persuasive. Now please drop all this chaff about the YLT, please, because I have not read much of it [very little, in fact] and because I have agreed with you [twice] about him being wrong about eternal God. How many times must I correct you???

Bible versions w/o "hell" - a shorter list than I thought, as I was thinking of another list of 77 scriptures friendly to universal salvation. Maybe another time...

A FEW BIBLE VERSIONS WITHOUT HELL

Wesley's New Testament (1755)

Scarlett's N.T. (1798)

The New Testament in Greek and English (Kneeland, 1823)

Young's Literal Translation (1891)

Twentieth Century New Testament (1900)

Rotherham's Emphasized Bible (reprinted, 1902)

Fenton's Holy Bible in Modern English (1903)

Weymouth's New Testament in Modern Speech (1903)

The New Testament, James Moffat, (1917)

Jewish Publication Society Bible Old Testament (1917)

Panin's Numeric English New Testament (1914)

The New Testament, Charles B. Williams, 1937

The People's New Covenant (Overbury, 1925)

Hanson's New Covenant (1884)

Western N.T. (1926)

NT of our Lord and Savior Anointed (Tomanek, 1958)

Concordant Literal NT (1983)

The N.T., A Translation (Clementson, 1938)

Emphatic Diaglott, Greek/English Interlinear (Wilson, 1942)

New American Bible (1970)

Restoration of Original Sacred Name Bible (1976)

Tanakh, The Holy Scriptures, Old Testament (1985)

The New Testament, A New Translation (Greber, 1980)

Christian Bible (1991)

World English Bible (in progress)

Orthodox Jewish Brit Chadasha [NT Only]

Original Bible Project (Dr. James Tabor, still in translation)

Zondervan Parallel N.T. in Greek and English (1975)**

Int. NASB-NIV Parallel N.T. in Greek and English (1993)**

A Critical Paraphrase of the N.T. by Vincent T. Roth (1960)

New Testament, Recovery Version, Living Stream Ministry, 1991

New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE) Roman Catholic

Holy Bible In Its Original Order, Fred R. Coulter, 2007

Etymological N.T. (An Ultra Literal Translation, 2011, Michael Wine

Aramaic Pe#ta New Testament, 2006, Janet M. Magiera

MirrorWord N.T. (Francois du Toit) still in translation

Victorious Gospel of Jesus Christ, Electronic Ver. (Tentmaker Ministries)

I can add a new version out of South Africa, called simply, The Sriptures - it has a very Hebraic flavor

These versions do not "catch on" for one simple reason - churches trot out their bound-to-denominational-theology theologians, who do a hit piece on any Bible version not likely to keep the pews and the offering plates full.

a reply to: Lazarus Short

Wait.... You've read very little of the YLT, but that's the one you chose to quote from to argue against what the KJV says, specifically about hell, externality, torment, etc?

"Bound to theology?"

Yes, that's how religion works... There are foundational ideas that are the underlying principles which everything else is built upon.

If you change those ideas based on misinterpreting what the words that define those underlying principles mean, then you're no longer following that religion...

So when you have foundational doctrine, such as letters from Paul, or gospels from people like Matthew, which are the basis for the entire religion, and those documents state, very specifically, that there is eternal torment, fire, hell, etc, and you decide they are incorrect, well, then you're not following Christian doctrine anymore....

Its nice that you provided a list of translations, but we can pare that down a little. For instance, it doesn't matter that the old testament doesn't say the world "hell." Christians aren't Jews. You know, new covenant, and all. So you van unlist any translations of the OT.

Now let's move onto the ones we can immediately prove as inaccurate, such as YLT, whose translation says that God is not eternal. How many of those get dropped?

And its odd that some of those translations listed conflict with each other, too... For example, the New Testament, Recovery Version John 3:16 says "everlasting," which is completely different than YLT's "age-during," unless you concede age-during to mean everlasting...

And, still in the recovery version, Matthew 25:41 "Then He will say also to those on the left, Go away from Me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. "

Eternal fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. Sounds a lot like hell....

Same exact passage in the New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE) Roman Catholic.

The New Testament, A New Translation (Greber), says fire eonian, prepared for the adversary and his followers. Remember we discussed eonian meaning eternal?

Weymouth's New Testament in Modern Speech , the "fire of the ages... Prepared for the devil..."

So it spans through the ages? As in eternal?

So how many are left of that list if you look at them HONESTLY?

I bet none.

As Raggedyman has pointed out there is scripture in Matthew 25:41 that disagree's with your premise. “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.’”.

The lake of fire is a reality according to that scripture. But it may not be incompatiable with your own feelings if you consider the realm in which we today exist is the Lake of Fire. Those that are thrown in lake of fire are destroyed. What is destroyed are all the concious memories from our previous life/s.

Consider that the light that you have experienced is not made of any such memories. But exists beyond conciousness itself. If you exist as that light then what dies cannot be you.

Does anyone ever get out of the Bible hell?

Rev. 20:13, 14, KJ: “The sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell* delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.” (So the dead will be delivered from hell. Notice also that hell is not the same as the lake of fire but will be cast into the lake of fire.) (*“Hell,” Dy, Kx; “the world of the dead,” TEV; “Hades,” NE, AS, RS, JB, NW.)

“The lake of fire” into which death, Hades, the symbolic “wild beast” and “the false prophet,” Satan, his demons, and the persistent practicers of wickedness on earth are cast is shown to mean “the second death.” (Re 20:10, 14, 15; 21:8; Mt 25:41) So it's not a literal lake of fire but a symbolic representation of “the second death.” It literally spells it out in Rev 20:14 (NW): “This means the second death, the lake of fire.” ESV: “This is the second death, the lake of fire.” Initially death resulted from and was passed on to mankind as a result of Adam’s transgression; hence “the second death” must be distinct from this inherited death. It is evident from the cited texts that there is no release possible from “the second death.” The situation of those in “the second death” corresponds to the outcome warned of in such texts as Hebrews 6:4-8; 10:26, 27; and Matthew 12:32. On the other hand, those represented as gaining “the crown of life” and having part in “the first resurrection” are free from any possibility of harm by the second death. (Re 2:10, 11) These, who are to reign with Christ, receive immortality (deathlessness) and incorruption and hence are beyond the “authority” of the second death.​—1Co 15:50-54; Re 20:6; compare Joh 8:51.

Is there eternal punishment for the wicked?

Matt. 25:46, KJ: “These shall go away into everlasting punishment [“lopping off,” Int; Greek, koʹla·sin]: but the righteous into life eternal.” (The Emphatic Diaglott reads “cutting-off” instead of “punishment.” A footnote states: “Kolasin . . . is derived from kolazoo, which signifies, 1. To cut off; as lopping off branches of trees, to prune. 2. To restrain, to repress. . . . 3. To chastise, to punish. To cut off an individual from life, or society, or even to restrain, is esteemed as punishment;—hence has arisen this third metaphorical use of the word. The primary signification has been adopted, because it agrees better with the second member of the sentence, thus preserving the force and beauty of the antithesis. The righteous go to life, the wicked to the cutting off from life, or death. See 2 Thess. 1.9.”)

2 Thess. 1:9, RS: “They shall suffer the punishment of eternal destruction* and exclusion from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might.” (*“Eternal ruin,” NAB, NE; “lost eternally,” JB; “condemn them to eternal punishment,” Kx; “eternal punishment in destruction,” Dy.)

Jude 7, KJ: “Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.” (The fire that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah ceased burning thousands of years ago. But the effect of that fire has been lasting; the cities have not been rebuilt. God’s judgment, however, was against not merely those cities but also their wicked inhabitants. What happened to them is a warning example. At Luke 17:29, Jesus says that they were “destroyed”; Jude 7 shows that the destruction was eternal.)

What is the meaning of the ‘eternal torment’ referred to in Revelation?

Rev. 14:9-11; 20:10, KJ: “If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: and the smoke of their torment [Greek, basa·ni·smouʹ] 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.” “And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.”

What is the ‘torment’ to which these texts refer? It is noteworthy that at Revelation 11:10 (KJ) reference is made to ‘prophets that torment those dwelling on the earth.’ Such torment results from humiliating exposure by the messages that these prophets proclaim. At Revelation 14:9-11 (KJ) worshipers of the symbolic “beast and his image” are said to be “tormented with fire and brimstone.” This cannot refer to conscious torment after death because “the dead know not any thing.” (Eccl. 9:5, KJ) Then, what causes them to experience such torment while they are still alive? It is the proclamation by God’s servants that worshipers of the “beast and his image” will experience second death, which is represented by “the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone.” The smoke, associated with their fiery destruction, ascends forever because the destruction will be eternal and will never be forgotten. When Revelation 20:10 says that the Devil is to experience ‘torment forever and ever’ in “the lake of fire and brimstone,” what does that mean? Revelation 21:8 (KJ) says clearly that “the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone” means “the second death.” So the Devil’s being “tormented” there forever means that there will be no relief for him; he will be held under restraint forever, actually in eternal death. This use of the word “torment” (from the Greek baʹsa·nos) reminds one of its use at Matthew 18:34, where the same basic Greek word is applied to a ‘jailer.’—RS, AT, ED, NW.

What is the ‘fiery Gehenna’ to which Jesus referred?

Reference to Gehenna appears 12 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures. Five times it is directly associated with fire. Translators have rendered the Greek expression geʹen·nan tou py·rosʹ as “hell fire” (KJ, Dy), “fires of hell” (NE), “fiery pit” (AT), and “fires of Gehenna” (NAB).

Historical background: The Valley of Hinnom (Gehenna) was outside the walls of Jerusalem. For a time it was the site of idolatrous worship, including child sacrifice. In the first century Gehenna was being used as the incinerator for the filth of Jerusalem. Bodies of dead animals were thrown into the valley to be consumed in the fires, to which sulfur, or brimstone, was added to assist the burning. Also bodies of executed criminals, who were considered undeserving of burial in a memorial tomb, were thrown into Gehenna. Thus, at Matthew 5:29, 30, Jesus spoke of the casting of one’s “whole body” into Gehenna. If the body fell into the constantly burning fire it was consumed, but if it landed on a ledge of the deep ravine its putrefying flesh became infested with the ever-present worms, or maggots. (Mark 9:47, 48) Living humans were not pitched into Gehenna; so it was not a place of conscious torment.

At Matthew 10:28, Jesus warned his hearers to “be in fear of him that can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.” What does it mean? Notice that there is no mention here of torment in the fires of Gehenna; rather, he says to ‘fear him that can destroy in Gehenna.’ By referring to the “soul” separately, Jesus here emphasizes that God can destroy all of a person’s life prospects; thus there is no hope of resurrection for him. So, the references to the ‘fiery Gehenna’ have the same meaning as ‘the lake of fire’ of Revelation 21:8, namely, destruction, “second death.”

What does the Bible say the penalty for sin is?

Rom. 6:23: “The wages sin pays is death.”

After one’s death, is he still subject to further punishment for his sins?

Rom. 6:7: “He who has died has been acquitted from his sin.”

Is eternal torment of the wicked compatible with God’s personality?

Jer. 7:31: “They [apostate Judeans] have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, in order to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, a thing that I had not commanded and that had not come up into my heart.” (If it never came into God’s heart, surely he does not have and use such a thing on a larger scale.)

Illustration: What would you think of a parent who held his child’s hand over a fire to punish the child for wrongdoing? “God is love.” (1 John 4:8) Would he do what no right-minded human parent would do? Certainly not! What is the origin of the teaching of hellfire? In ancient Babylonian and Assyrian beliefs the “nether world . . . is pictured as a place full of horrors, and is presided over by gods and demons of great strength and fierceness.” (The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, Boston, 1898, Morris Jastrow, Jr., p. 581) Early evidence of the fiery aspect of Christendom’s hell is found in the religion of ancient Egypt. (The Book of the Dead, New Hyde Park, N.Y., 1960, with introduction by E. A. Wallis Budge, pp. 144, 149, 151, 153, 161) Buddhism, which dates back to the 6th century B.C.E., in time came to feature both hot and cold hells. (The Encyclopedia Americana, 1977, Vol. 14, p. 68) Depictions of hell portrayed in Catholic churches in Italy have been traced to Etruscan roots.—La civiltà etrusca (Milan, 1979), Werner Keller, p. 389. But the real roots of this God-dishonoring doctrine go much deeper. The fiendish concepts associated with a hell of torment slander God and originate with the chief slanderer of God (the Devil, which name means “Slanderer”), the one whom Jesus Christ called “the father of the lie.”—John 8:44.

a reply to: rounda

Where does the bible teach eternal torment for humanity
The fire is eternal, are humans eternal, I can’t find any biblical evidence that humanity outside of Jesus are eternal.
Your premise is flawed

a reply to: whereislogic

Your post was excellent for the most part, and your mention of Buddhism reminded me that my quest to find out if "hell" was real or not began with a magazine article I read in the early 1990's. A color illustration at the head of the article depicted the Tibetan Buddhist "hell". I noticed that the main difference from Christian depictions of "hell" was simply the artistic style. Right then, the question gelled in my mind, where did our ideas of "hell" come from?

My best friend, btw, an ex-Buddhist (now Muslim) explained to me that in Buddhism, "hell" is thought of as something like a psychological state, a realm that people live in, in the here-and-now, within themselves.

A comment on "kolasin" - some suggest that the Greek root refers to the pruning of fruit trees so that they will produce more and better fruit afterwards. I think that interpretation speaks against the non-salvation of the wicked.

a reply to: rounda

"Eternal fire" is eternal because it is Godfire. Recall all the Scriptures where Fire is associated with God or with Jesus the Christ. There is Fire coming from His throne, there is a Sea of glass mingled with Fire, there is the Lake of Fire, and on and on. This is why the LoF is not identified as "hell" in the Bible - because it is Godfire. Understand that, and most everything else will fall into place. All supernatural fire in the Bible is Godfire. There is no "hellfire."

You say, "So when you have foundational doctrine, such as letters from Paul...and those documents state, very specifically, that there is eternal torment, fire, hell..." Please supply Scriptures written by Paul where he mentions ECT or "hell." I don't think he does anywhere. I mentioned that I could easily supply (it's on my hard drive) a list of 77 UR-friendly Bible quotes. Team "hell" has far fewer, and trots out the same handful of proof texts over and over. I have found them all to be badly translated, and that is why I am a Christian Universalist. Don't think for a moment that I am a Unitarian Universalist - let's get that out of the way right now. I was once a believer in ECT and "hell," and it was my quest to find out what was true that convinced me otherwise.

Brother, I marvel at how you dismiss so many Bible versions. How many of them do you own or have read?

originally posted by: Lazarus Short
a reply to: rounda

"Eternal fire" is eternal because it is Godfire. Recall all the Scriptures where Fire is associated with God or with Jesus the Christ. There is Fire coming from His throne, there is a Sea of glass mingled with Fire, there is the Lake of Fire, and on and on. This is why the LoF is not identified as "hell" in the Bible - because it is Godfire. Understand that, and most everything else will fall into place. All supernatural fire in the Bible is Godfire. There is no "hellfire."

You say, "So when you have foundational doctrine, such as letters from Paul...and those documents state, very specifically, that there is eternal torment, fire, hell..." Please supply Scriptures written by Paul where he mentions ECT or "hell." I don't think he does anywhere. I mentioned that I could easily supply (it's on my hard drive) a list of 77 UR-friendly Bible quotes. Team "hell" has far fewer, and trots out the same handful of proof texts over and over. I have found them all to be badly translated, and that is why I am a Christian Universalist. Don't think for a moment that I am a Unitarian Universalist - let's get that out of the way right now. I was once a believer in ECT and "hell," and it was my quest to find out what was true that convinced me otherwise.

Brother, I marvel at how you dismiss so many Bible versions. How many of them do you own or have read?

I already have provided you Paul's view on eternal torment. I guess you don't know which scriptures are Paul's letters?

I don't dismiss any of them, unless they're blatantly wrong, like YLT which says, in your definition, that God is not eternal.

Mostly, I dismiss your incorrect interpretations of them.

originally posted by: rounda


I already have provided you Paul's view on eternal torment. I guess you don't know which scriptures are Paul's letters?

I don't dismiss any of them, unless they're blatantly wrong, like YLT which says, in your definition, that God is not eternal.

Mostly, I dismiss your incorrect interpretations of them.

How do you KNOW my interpretations are incorrect? Have you gone on a personal quest to find the Truth, or did you just accept what you were told by Authority?

Well, in our busy back-and-forth, I must have missed what you posted about Paul's view on "eternal torment." It is my honest opinion that he never spoke of "hell," but prove me wrong if you can.

originally posted by: Lazarus Short

originally posted by: rounda


I already have provided you Paul's view on eternal torment. I guess you don't know which scriptures are Paul's letters?

I don't dismiss any of them, unless they're blatantly wrong, like YLT which says, in your definition, that God is not eternal.

Mostly, I dismiss your incorrect interpretations of them.

How do you KNOW my interpretations are incorrect? Have you gone on a personal quest to find the Truth, or did you just accept what you were told by Authority?

Well, in our busy back-and-forth, I must have missed what you posted about Paul's view on "eternal torment." It is my honest opinion that he never spoke of "hell," but prove me wrong if you can.

So Paul talking about eternal destruction, torment, condemnation... those are not good enough for you? He has to specifically say the word "Hell?"

I don't have to prove you wrong. The Bible already does.

But you ignore it.

It seems odd to me you can sit there and quote something which goes against a fundamental teaching of Christianity, that God is eternal, and use it to argue your position as if it lends any credibility to it.

Because that is what Paul defines as "false doctrine."

Galatians 1:8-9
But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!


Here's a question for you, Christian Universalist:

What if I don't accept Jesus as my lord and savior? What if the age of punishment and torment comes and goes, and I'm still a non-believer? What my non-eternal torment doesn't work, and I still don't believe?

How long will I be punished for?

I wonder who will be saved first, me or Hitler?

I mean, if EVERYONE is saved, there's no need for me to have repentance, or even believe in Jesus, because eventually I'll be saved anyway.

originally posted by: roundaIt seems odd to me you can sit there and quote something which goes against a fundamental teaching of Christianity, that God is eternal, and use it to argue your position as if it lends any credibility to it.

I told you TWICE and explained exactly why God is eternal, but you just cannot get the false impression you have out of your mind. Anyway, it was YOU who brought up that verse about God being an "age-during" God, not me.

I cannot see any use of further conversation.

originally posted by: Lazarus Short

originally posted by: roundaIt seems odd to me you can sit there and quote something which goes against a fundamental teaching of Christianity, that God is eternal, and use it to argue your position as if it lends any credibility to it.

I told you TWICE and explained exactly why God is eternal, but you just cannot get the false impression you have out of your mind. Anyway, it was YOU who brought up that verse about God being an "age-during" God, not me.

I cannot see any use of further conversation.

Using the bible translation YOU were quoting to make your argument about punishment not being eternal.

Same word, different meanings? I thought Hebrew and Greek were extremely concrete in their concepts? So how can aionion/aionios torment not be eternal, but the aionion/aionios God is eternal?

Straight from YOUR source.

Seems like YOUR source contradicts YOUR argument.

originally posted by: rounda

Here's a question for you, Christian Universalist:

What if I don't accept Jesus as my lord and savior? What if the age comes and goes, and I'm still a non-believer? What my non-eternal torment doesn't work, and I still don't believe?

How long will I be punished for?

I wonder who will be saved first, me or Hitler?

I mean, if EVERYONE is saved, there's no need for me to have repentance, or even believe in Jesus, because eventually I'll be saved anyway.

Your very questions indicate that you know next to nothing about Christian Universalism. In answer, none of that is for us to judge. We are told to believe and do good, not to judge before the time to do so. As for you and Hitler, how do you know that you are saved or that Hitler is not? You don't - it's for God to judge, not you or me. Jesus told the Pharisees that the tax collectors and whores would enter heaven before them - so guard your faith and be humble before your God. I say this as a Christian bother. As to your last question, yes ALL are saved, but remember that it is a process as well as a goal, and many, maybe even most, will need to go through the Lake of Fire before their dross, tares, chaff, wood, hay and stubble are burned away. Remember that sinners are saved, but the adversaries are burned. The adversaries are NOT us. God loves us more than we can know in this life, but He hates the adversaries.

originally posted by: rounda

Using the bible translation YOU were quoting to make your argument about punishment not being eternal.

Same word, different meanings? I thought Hebrew and Greek were extremely concrete in their concepts? So how can aionion/aionios torment not be eternal, but the aionion/aionios God is eternal?

Straight from YOUR source.

Seems like YOUR source contradicts YOUR argument.

Twisting much? Did I not explain that Young was not infallable? No, the KJV translators were not either. Keep in mind that I have studied the KJV MUCH more than I have studied the YLT, but you won't let me off the hook.

Let me put it this way: God is the "age-during" God. He is the God of EVERY age. He is eternal too. Happy now?

Or...do you just like to argue???

a reply to: Lazarus Short

I like how you take the time to respond but don't actually address the question.

How long does punishment last if I don't accept Jesus as my lord and savior after the age of punishment?

Let me put it this way: God is the "age-during" God. He is the God of EVERY age. He is eternal too. Happy now?

Where does it say that God is eternal in YLT? Because unless the translation literally says the word "eternal," then you're misinterpreting the infallible word of God. Unless "age-during" means eternal, of course...

That's the way this works, right?

I'm not twisting anything. YOU said "age-during" didn't mean "eternal" when it came to torment. So I showed you where age-during is used where it is UNIVERSALLY understood to mean eternal, in the same translation you used repeatedly.

No, I won't let you off the hook, because YOU chose to quote a very specific bible translation to advance your argument, and then act like I'm in the wrong for showing you the translation you (mis)quote is in complete contradiction to the fundamental doctrine of the Christian religion.

Isn't it odd that you have to use that specific translation to push an argument that contradicts 2000 years of Christian doctrine?

originally posted by: rounda
a reply to: Lazarus Short

I like how you take the time to respond but don't actually address the question.

How long does punishment last if I don't accept Jesus as my lord and savior after the age of punishment?

Let me put it this way: God is the "age-during" God. He is the God of EVERY age. He is eternal too. Happy now?

Where does it say that God is eternal in YLT? Because unless the translation literally says the word "eternal," then you're misinterpreting the infallible word of God. Unless "age-during" means eternal, of course...

That's the way this works, right?

I'm not twisting anything. YOU said "age-during" didn't mean "eternal" when it came to torment. So I showed you where age-during is used where it is UNIVERSALLY understood to mean eternal, in the same translation you used repeatedly.

No, I won't let you off the hook, because YOU chose to quote a very specific bible translation to advance your argument, and then act like I'm in the wrong for showing you the translation you (mis)quote is in complete contradiction to the fundamental doctrine of the Christian religion.

Isn't it odd that you have to use that specific translation to push an argument that contradicts 2000 years of Christian doctrine?

This is the last time I am going to tell you. I am losing my patience. I quoted the YLT once and you have been giving me "hell" ever since. I patiently explained to you that Young, like every other Bible translator, is fallible. I patiently explained to you that I agreed that God is eternal...and why. What else do you want? I barely use the YLT, for crying out loud!

If I am not answering your questions to suit you, you may be asking the wrong questions...or your questions and constant static may be a smokescreen for something else, like the FACT that I quote the KJV way more than the YLT. Both have problems, but what English Bible version does not?

BTW, it is NOT "2000 years of Christian doctrine," as the doctrine of ECT and "hell" is only about 1500 years old.

originally posted by: Lazarus Short

originally posted by: rounda
a reply to: Lazarus Short

I like how you take the time to respond but don't actually address the question.

How long does punishment last if I don't accept Jesus as my lord and savior after the age of punishment?

Let me put it this way: God is the "age-during" God. He is the God of EVERY age. He is eternal too. Happy now?

Where does it say that God is eternal in YLT? Because unless the translation literally says the word "eternal," then you're misinterpreting the infallible word of God. Unless "age-during" means eternal, of course...

That's the way this works, right?

I'm not twisting anything. YOU said "age-during" didn't mean "eternal" when it came to torment. So I showed you where age-during is used where it is UNIVERSALLY understood to mean eternal, in the same translation you used repeatedly.

No, I won't let you off the hook, because YOU chose to quote a very specific bible translation to advance your argument, and then act like I'm in the wrong for showing you the translation you (mis)quote is in complete contradiction to the fundamental doctrine of the Christian religion.

Isn't it odd that you have to use that specific translation to push an argument that contradicts 2000 years of Christian doctrine?

This is the last time I am going to tell you. I am losing my patience. I quoted the YLT once and you have been giving me "hell" ever since. I patiently explained to you that Young, like every other Bible translator, is fallible. I patiently explained to you that I agreed that God is eternal...and why. What else do you want? I barely use the YLT, for crying out loud!

If I am not answering your questions to suit you, you may be asking the wrong questions...or your questions and constant static may be a smokescreen for something else, like the FACT that I quote the KJV way more than the YLT. Both have problems, but what English Bible version does not?

BTW, it is NOT "2000 years of Christian doctrine," as the doctrine of ECT and "hell" is only about 1500 years old.

You barely use the YLT, except to advance the argument that eternal doesn't mean eternal.

You're still not answering the question. Here it is for the third time... second time all by itself, bolded.

How long does punishment last if I don't accept Jesus as my lord and savior after the age of punishment?

BTW, the 4 gospels, which talk about eternal torment and hell, the devil and his angels, etc... were written between 50 and 90 CE... and Paul's Epistles, where he talks about eternal destruction and punishment, were written between 30 and 70 CE.

And most damning, is Revelation was written before 100 CE... so...

So yea, 2000 years of Christian doctrine.

originally posted by: rounda

You barely use the YLT, except to advance the argument that eternal doesn't mean eternal.

You're still not answering the question. Here it is for the third time... second time all by itself, bolded.

How long does punishment last if I don't accept Jesus as my lord and savior after the age of punishment?

BTW, the 4 gospels, which talk about eternal torment and hell, the devil and his angels, etc... were written between 50 and 90 CE... and Paul's Epistles, where he talks about eternal destruction and punishment, were written between 30 and 70 CE.

And most damning, is Revelation was written before 100 CE... so...

So yea, 2000 years of Christian doctrine.

I already answered, you must not be listening. If you do not, HYPOTHETICALLY, accept Jesus and so on, your punishment lasts until Godfire has purified you. Remember EVERY knee will bow and EVERY tongue will confess...

Do you really think you must explain TO ME when the New Testament was written? I became a Christian in 1977. As for your 2000 years, yes, it was all written down when you say...but the text was changed at some point. From what I have read, it happened when later Latin versions were produced. Give me a version translated direct from the Greek and Hebrew. The version I'm now reading was translated by a group of Messianic Jews in South Africa, so it lacks Latinate corruption, including "hell," word or concept.