- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
02 Nov 18
2 edits
@KellyJay
I hope he attempts an answer.
We should have equal reason to take both pronouncements about the eternal state of those stated -
Christ on one hand:
" ... The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever." (Rev. 11:15b)
The Devil (with two other men) on the other:
"And the Devil who deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where also the beast and the false prophet were; and they shall be tormented day and night forever and ever." (Rev. 20:10)
03 Nov 18
1 edit
@sonship saidI’m not interested is your further questions until you answer the ones I put to KellyJay and which you are referring to.
Divegeester,
Is Revelation all literal or not?
If not, which bits are metaphors/symbolism and why?"
Which one of these two passages speak of something that will not happen?
" ... The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever." (Rev. 11:15b)
...[text shortened]... quote]
If only ONE of the two prophecies will happen, how do you know that the other will not ?
Is everything in Revelation literal ?
If not p, which parts are metaphors and how do you distinguish between them?
Unless you are prepared to answer these question honestly and unequivocally I will not answer you questions Sonship.
03 Nov 18
1 edit
@kellyjay saidOf course it does, if YOU claim Jesus in hell overseeing eternal torture is literal...OR COURSE it matters. This is just a dodge by you.
It doesn't matter if it they are symbolic or not
I’m afraid I find you to be either dishonest or simply lacking in any ability to discuss this topic.
You: eternal torture is REAL
Me: no it isn’t
YOU: it doesn’t matter if it’s literal or not
Me: so why choose to believe it is then?
You: because it’s in the bible
Can you see how ridiculous you come across?
03 Nov 18
@divegeester saidShow me what it means if it doesn't mean what it says.
Of course it does, if YOU claim Jesus in hell overseeing eternal torture is literal...OR COURSE it matters. This is just a dodge by you.
I’m afraid I find you to be either dishonest or simply lacking in any ability to discuss this topic.
You: eternal torture is REAL
Me: no it isn’t
YOU: it doesn’t matter if it’s literal or not
Me: so why choose to believe it is then?
You: because it’s in the bible
Can you see how ridiculous you come across?
03 Nov 18
@divegeester saidYou ever wonder why you insist on calling someone dishonest for holding a different
Of course it does, if YOU claim Jesus in hell overseeing eternal torture is literal...OR COURSE it matters. This is just a dodge by you.
I’m afraid I find you to be either dishonest or simply lacking in any ability to discuss this topic.
You: eternal torture is REAL
Me: no it isn’t
YOU: it doesn’t matter if it’s literal or not
Me: so why choose to believe it is then?
You: because it’s in the bible
Can you see how ridiculous you come across?
view from yours, or question their ability to reason and think? Why not lay off the
personal stuff and just discuss the topic?
03 Nov 18
@kellyjay saidWhy, will you accept what I say?
Show me what it means if it doesn't mean what it says.
03 Nov 18
1 edit
@kellyjay saidYou are lying again!!
You ever wonder why you insist on calling someone dishonest for holding a different
view from yours, or question their ability to reason and think? Why not lay off the
personal stuff and just discuss the topic?
I have NEVER called you or anyone else “dishonest” for disagreeing with me.
You are dishonest in debate NOT for what you believe.
Please try to understand, your incomprehension makes it impossibly to converse intelligently with you.
03 Nov 18
@divegeester saidI'm asking you for your opinion, I'll accept what you say as what you think. I may
Why, will you accept what I say?
disagree with you, but we would have something to discuss.
03 Nov 18
@divegeester said"I’m afraid I find you to be either dishonest or simply lacking in any ability to discuss this topic. "
You are lying again!!
I have NEVER called you or anyone else “dishonest” for disagreeing with me.
You are dishonest in debate NOT for what you believe.
Please try to understand, your incomprehension makes it impossibly to converse intelligently with you.
"You are lying again!!"
please
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
I’m not interested is your further questions until you answer the ones I put to KellyJay and which you are referring to.
I don't think that is the reason you avoid the question.
It appears that you wish to make a kind of false dichotomy around the symbolism of the Bible.
It appears that you reason that certain things MAY be communicated in symbols but other things CANNOT.
But it appears the reason why those you think CANNOT be communicated in symbols are arbitrary reasons. You don't like them. That's all.
Is everything in Revelation literal ?
The question seems to want to establish a false dichotomy.
OF COURSE there are deep things communicated to us in terms of symbols and signs.
I think you have a FALSE dichotomy to argue - "Well is it all literal or all symbolic?"
Take for instance the phrase "the Lamb" which occurs in Revelation more than anywhere else in the Bible.
"The Lamb" is a sign.
The Redeemer Jesus Christ, Who suffered and died as a sacrifice is literal.
So you see the problem in asking "Well, is Revelation literal or not?" - a false dichotomy.
Christ is not a little creature with a tail and a body of white wool. But Christ is the Redeemer who died as the Passover Lamb for the sins of the world.
So a teaching of eternal punishment which you hate, you hope to prove not true by asking if a lake of fire is literal or a sign (symbolic).
How much symbolism there is in the revealed "lake of fire" may be an argument. But I don't think that the truth that it points TO is NOT because it may contain something metaphorical.
Christ is not a little four legged creature with wool.
But Christ IS a creature - (God become incarnated as a creature)
So "Lamb of God" has some amount of literal meaning to it in that He is indeed a man, a creature, an incarnated human who was able to be sacrificed.
And a "lake of fire", I think, includes some amount of literal description. I think the actual hot bowels of the earth as magma and lava will indeed belch forth with brimstone and fire. That does not mean that the nature of the punishment is restricted to those physical elements.
That is my best assessment of the communication.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
So I view this terrible thing probably as literal - PLUS.
I mean into the brimestone the enemies of God will go but the supernatural component of the punishment is not hindered because of the physics of it. That is physics that we know of today.
"And the Devil who deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where also the beast and the false prophet were; and they shall be tormented day and night forever and ever." (Rev. 20:10)
I realize the Devil is a spirit.
I realize that the the other two are men.
Regardless, what right do I have to say God cannot do there what He says He will do to the evil spirit as well as the two human enemies. Namely -
... cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where also the beast and the false prophet were; and they shall be tormented day and night forever and ever."
If you are convinced that we humans have some ground, literary, scientific, morally, or otherwise, to DICTATE to God that it is IMPOSSIBLE for Him to carry out concerning His enemies ... " ... cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where also the beast and the false prophet were; and they shall be tormented day and night forever and ever" you go ahead and take that position.
I cannot take that position - that Revelation 20:10 will not, cannot, be done in any sense by God Almighty.
No amount of me insisting - "Well, is Revelation literal or not?" furnishes me with a rationale that ...
God will not punish forever the Devil, the Antichrist, and the false prophet. Whoever's name is not found written in the book of life apparently go to the same place. (See Rev. 20:15)
Whether the result is the same exactly, I don't know.
But no one should be curious to go there to discover so or not.
Everything I am told about the place means to me that it is to be saved from, and avoided through Christ's the Savior.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Unless you are prepared to answer these question honestly and unequivocally I will not answer you questions Sonship.
"Let me re-ask you. Let me re-ask you again." seems to be a form of denial or something you utilize to erect a defense around concepts you will never relinquish.
You believe as you have to. But pressing metaphor, symbolism, sign in the whole Bible, and especially Revelation does not remove my receiving the communication from God to us that there will be eternal punishment that is not non-existence.
The words are pretty emphatic that the lake of fire is the second death.
And death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire." (Rev. 20:14)
I think probably what John saw was the pictorial images of death and Hades in chapter 6 go into the lake of fire.
I am not sure what this is about "p". Maybe there is a post I haven't read yet. I think this reply answers your objections anyway.
03 Nov 18
@sonship saidVery well written.
@divegeester
I’m not interested is your further questions until you answer the ones I put to KellyJay and which you are referring to.
I don't think that is the reason you avoid the question.
It appears that you wish to make a kind of false dichotomy around the symbolism of the Bible.
It appears that you reason that certain things MAY be communicated ...[text shortened]... shment is restricted to those physical elements.
That is my best assessment of the communication.