Go back
‘Eternal suffering’ is nonsensical

‘Eternal suffering’ is nonsensical

Spirituality


Originally posted by @dj2becker
I understand that you didn't want to answer the simple discursive challenge from Nick to clarify your disappointing first foray.
You've copy-pasted something I posted and addressed it to me even though it doesn't fit, like a child might.

1 edit

1 edit

-Removed-
Yes, of course I draw distinction between those who worship the Beast and those who reject Christ.

And, for your information, rejection of Christ is the minor sin of the two here.

This eternal torment is reserved for Satan and his lieutenants and for everyone who had worshipped the Beast and/or taken his mark. Those who reject Christ are simply among the rest of humanity who are "not saved" for whatever reason. For those, I believe they face "the second death" or as some would call it, annihilation, in the Lake of Fire. They "perish" or "face destruction" (no, no "eternal torment" ), as recounted throughout the Bible.


Originally posted by @nicksten
Sorry I have no idea what you're trying to say.
It's a pity that you simply bailed out. Because you tacked an oddly personalized assertion onto the end of your post. Your post seemed to show some promise. I thought that you were going to end with a coherent point of view about the consequence of a lack of belief. And I also thought that you were going to end with a coherent point of view about who has created that consequence.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by @suzianne
Yes, of course I draw distinction between those who worship the Beast and those who reject Christ.
What happens to those who reject Christ?

edit: apologies you already answered it.


-Removed-
So do you agree that this eternal torment is reserved for those who worship the Beast and take his mark, as the passage says?

Nothing about "rejecting Christ"?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by @dj2becker to Suzianne
If I remember correctly he said the unbelievers would simply cease to exist. I asked divegeester about his interpretation of Lazarus and the rich man.
Are you going to tackle Suzianne about what her interpretation of Lazarus and the rich man is?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Vote Up
Vote Down


Originally posted by @fmf
Are you going to tackle Suzianne about what her interpretation of Lazarus and the rich man is?
Does anyone care?

Seriously, you and your "divide and conquer" BS.

You are always all about sending Christians to eviscerate other Christians in this forum. Yeah, I know that's how you get your jollies, but come on...


Originally posted by @suzianne
Does anyone care?

Seriously, you and your "divide and conquer" BS.

You are always all about sending Christians to eviscerate other Christians in this forum. Yeah, I know that's how you get your jollies, but come on...
"Eviscerate"? Are you sure you know what the word means?

More interestingly, hearing your interpretation of Lazarus and the rich man could cause a divided-and-conquered situation? You make your beliefs sound very brittle.

1 edit


-Removed-
Look, the verses I quoted mention the worship of the Beast and taking his mark not once, but twice, without even mentioning the rejection of Christ once. What more do you need? Or must you be like Eladar, who merely asserts that the Bible says what he wants it to say?

These are the only verses which I think could possibly be used to defend the idea of "eternal torment". Who else would deserve the horrific idea of "eternal torment" more than Satan, the Beast, the False Prophet and those who worship the Beast or take his mark?

And other humans? Merely for the sin of not "believing in Jesus" or accepting his sacrificial death on the cross? No. Annihilation (the second death) is enough.

The verses are crystal clear, so yes, I defend my use of "of course".

And if I were you, I would seriously re-think your demoting the sin of worshipping the Beast down to simple "beast-worship".

Vote Up
Vote Down

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

-Removed-
Yes, I actually agree.

Christ's death covers Everything, EXCEPT worshipping the Beast and/or taking his mark. Now do you see why doing so is SUCH a big deal in Revelation? It is miles beyond simply rejecting Christ. It is "going over to the other side". The only people shot by their own side during wartime are traitors.

"One does not need an alternative premise in order to be able to reject an incorrect one."

Really? How then can you make sense of it? Can you honestly say that you believe sinners just go off to Heaven (or your version of it) regardless of their unrepentant sin? That there is NO "punishment" to answer for their sin? In my belief, Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life. If you reject Christ, you reject his offer of eternal life. You face the second death, which the Bible also talks about. But I do reject the idea of "eternal torment" except for those particular ones named in Rev 14:9-11.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.