@RJHinds and burning in hell

-Removed-

I think a serious student of the Bible upon hearing this, if unfamiliar, would seek more substantiation.

My first books that expounded the Bible in an impressive word were by Brethren teachers. Like the Bereans, I have always wanted to see if these things were really so by examining the Scriptures.

-Removed-

Your communicating is becoming obscure. I don't really want to chat.

-Removed-

1) "Do you believe in an eternal hell where the unbelievers will reside in eternal suffering?"

No. I believe what the Bible teaches on the subject, namely, that those who's names are not written in the book of life will be cast into the lake of fire.

2) "Assuming RJHinds did say that I deserve to burn in hell for refusing to accept the doctrine of eternal suffering, do you think he would correct in making such an assertion?"

Jesus Christ is judge, not me. I have no way of knowing whether you are a saved person or not since I do not know what you believe except that you don't believe in eternal punishment with suffering. I would be interested to hear from you what it is you believe concerning the doctrine of salvation.

I don't believe RJ said that you would go to hell for not believing in the doctrine of eternal suffering. I think you have mischaracterize what RJ said. I doubt you can produce a quote that actually says what you are accusing RJ of saying. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

So, do you believe in the doctrine of eternal suffering, whereby those cast into the lake of fire are in there, alive, for eternity?

Did you answer my question about Luke 23:43 ?

When Jesus told the believing thief "Today you will be with Me in Paradise." - on THAT day was God keeping them alive in Paradise or keeping them dead in Paradise ?

The so called "cultish book" we call the New Testament says that on that day Jesus died (v. 46). Are you suggesting that Jesus came back to life and the thief came back to life on THAT day and went ALIVE to Paradise?

-Removed-

I was talking to you when I asked you the question.
If you'd rather hem and haw than answer, it is plain for everyone to see you're probably scared of the most logical answer.

God was keeping Jesus and the thief dead when they went to Paradise on that day.

So the lost "dead" are kept dead while in the lake of fire.

Now please continue talking to Josephw.
It is equally revealing of the weakness of your position on annihilation.

(Excuse me please if I do not read the signals of those little faces well. I get my cues more from words.)

-Removed-

Can you in some way relate why you are asking me these questions to ANY point you are trying to make?

Sure. My asking this question is related to what I might consider one of your stronger points. However it is not quite strong enough.

And that is the usage of the word death or dead. Your point is that any "eternal suffering" would have mean the sufferer was NOT dead but alive. It is an argument worth considering.

But, unfortunately, if we go by the New Testament, your point is not strong enough.

Now if you want to say "Well, I don't take that cult book as God's word. It is full of mistakes. And the mistaken parts I will fill in my thought to get to the truth" then you can go away unimpressed.

For many "dead" used in the Bible does not mean non-existence.
Jesus died with the thief and as dead was in a realm that God has for those who have physically died, at least realm He reveals to us. In this case a pleasant place - "Paradise".

It stands to reason God could have an unpleasent place as well for those physically dead.

And this answers your objection about the dead being kept alive in the lake of fire. No, they are kept dead. In fact it is called "the second death."

I find you exhausting; so many words and so little to actually say. Ask me a direct question and I'll answer it as well as I can.

Name a punishment that does not involve some kind of suffering?
I don't think you can name a punishment that does NOT involve suffering.

One more question too:

If "eternal punishment" does involve suffering, then is Jesus Christ unrighteous for even mentioning that there is "eternal punishment" (Matt. 25:46) ?

The two questions are linked. If there is punishment without suffering then to not exist is a punishment. But if there is no such thing as punishment without suffering, then non-existence cannot be a punishment. It cannot be "eternal punishment".

Furthermore, if eternal punishment of suffering is immoral, than Jesus is immoral for warning us about it.

I don't believe Jesus Christ was or is immoral in any way.