Hell Debate: Does the Bible Teach Traditionalism or Annihilationism? - Chris Date vs James Martin

In this live discussion, Chris Date and James Martin discuss whether the Bible teaches Traditionalism (the traditional view that the damned are consciously tormented forever) or Annhilationism (the view that the damned do not live forever).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINKS
Website: capturingchrist...
Patreon: / capturingchristianity
One-time Donation: donorbox.org/c...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOCIAL
Facebook: / capturingchristianity
Twitter: / capturingchrist
SoundCloud: / capturingchristianity
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GET IN TOUCH
Email: capturingchrist...

[@rjonesx]

Non-Christians watching this... This is an "in-house" debate. Nowhere in the Bible will you see Jesus say you need to know the correct doctrine of Hell in order to get into Heaven. There is no theology exam prior to salvation.

[@ConcealedCourier]

I've seen christians wear otherwise. This is where you think everyone other than you is going.. and yet you claim this is "in house". Interesting.

[@rjonesx]

@@ConcealedCourier oh, certainly many Christians use the threat of hell to try and convince people to convert. They also fervently believe their position and share it publicly. What I mean by in-house debate is just that one's understanding of the issue isn't doesn't determine your salvation. There just is no place in the NT where it says understanding the doctrine of hell is what gets you into heaven

[@devjono]

No it doesn't determine whether we are saved or not (for you). But for many, Eternal Hell and torment is a big deciding factor for not following God and accepting His salvation. So then one can then argue it is a salvation issue. Maybe not to you but for others out there searching for truth, Having been taught a lie and not hearing the truth on what the Bible truly teaches is a salvation issue and then does become a in-house and out of house debate. Please understand Im not here to attack but provide another perspective on the issues at hand, Because we are not all the same. And our journey to God and his salvation is not the same to any one else. Eternal Hell also miss represents/Changes Our Father in Heaven Character. Part of Jesus's mission was to show Gods true character. "if you have seen me then you have seen the father" Jesus did not mean in a physical sense but of the character He showed and portrayed to them and us. The way he conducted himself ( How he waked the walk). So if eternal Hell is not true, then its miss characterizing of Our Father in Heaven is also not true. And changes the way we see God and how we read the Bible. Just a massive shift in thinking. A paradigm Shift of a massive scale. We cannot Down play this as it has massive consequences to and for many out there searching for truth. Massive shifts on how we see God. And for many whether or not to Follow Our Father in Heaven to Eternal life.

[@TheMorning_Son]

@@rjonesxeternal hell is a lie and nothing but misunderstandings of the eternal fire of God. It basically is a false vision of the Heavenly Father.

[@theresa263]

Most people want to know this first and foremost because it's a major block to salvation. I don't believe people will burn forever in hell, but we've been conditioned to believe this doctrine.

[@truthtransistorradio6716]

A few things that caused me to change my mind from ECT to CI: 1. There are many passages that use terms like perish, death, the wicked shall be no more, etc. 2. Only one verse in the bible taken literally says that anyone is tormented without end. In Revelation 20. But that phrase is only used referring to the dragon, beast, and false prophet. Other passages talk about eternal or unquenched fire, undying worms, smoke going up forever, etc. Even when taken literally, these say nothing about the person in the lake of fire. 3. A few passages that use the word eternal or forever in the bible don't mean unending. Jonah said he was in the pit forever, then God reacued him. Fallen angels are in eternal chains in Tartarus until the judgment. Also, Sodom and Gomorrah were punished with eternal fire. 4. Jesus said,'Don't fear man who can kill the body, but fear God who can kill both body and soul in Gahenna'. This convinced me that the 2nd death is the death of the soul. 5. Revelation 21 says there will be no more death or sorrow. If death is simply separation from God, then people will be in a conscious state of death and sorrow forever. So, I am now convinced that the wicked will be no more, as the bible states.

[@NorthernNessa]

This is a really good list, thank you

[@Mathetesofscripture]

Death could be a separation from God. But how does one totally separate from an omnipresent God? In my mind, the only way to be apart from omnipresence is to stop existing entirely. Furthermore, if God in all His power can bring something into existence, it would seem logical that He could also render creation into nothing at all.

[@truthtransistorradio6716]

@@Mathetesofscripture Yes, exactly. God told Adam what death was. 'Dust you are! And to dust you shall return!' He didn't mention anything about a conscious soul. Why do people think that God would wait thousands of years to tell us about that? I am open to a conscious soul leading up to the resurrection. But I am convinced that even the soul dies in the lake of fire.

[@jacoblewis8537]

I think the main debate is really held in the defining of the words life and death. Are they the state of being, and the state of non being? Are they things that we receive? Are they describing events that happen to us moment to moment? You can be dieing or living, you can die or live, you can be alive or dead, you can HAVE life or death. I think they are things. More specifically, things that we receive in a form of harvest. We reap what we sow. So, if they are things/events that we have/experience, then it is possible for someone to have eternal death, and continue to exist as one who is dieing rather than living. So, I think it's better to say that some will experience life eternally, while others will experience death eternally, but both will exist forever.

[@truthtransistorradio6716]

@@jacoblewis8537 The only problem with the idea of people dying continually is that in Revelation 21 it says that the last enemy to be destroyed is death. There will be no more death, sorrow or pain!

[@Vinylfiend60]

Chris Date is a force of nature. He is such a great advocate for those of us that believe sincerely that God will burn up sinners not endlessly torment them.

[@exclusive_148]

In around the 20min mark, Chris didnt address the issue of the intermediate state where one person could ve suffering for thousands of year while the other might only suffer 5mins before all unsaved people get annihilated. He responded by saying "the passage of time is different" WHICH IS NOT BIBLICAL??? WHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT TALK ABOUT THE INTERMEDIATE STATE PASSAGE OF TIME IS DIFFERENT??

[@exclusive_148]

How is chris a force of nature?? lol where in the video did he disprove james???

[@Vinylfiend60]

@@exclusive_148 I think he makes a very powerful case for conditional immortality. He has convinced many people that originally believed in ECT that it is not actually supported by the scriptures. His ability to deal honestly with everything skeptics throw at him and give very thoughtful bible based answers. He checks all the boxes for me when it comes to making a strong case for his position.

[@exclusive_148]

I agree Chris is a great debater and he no doubt has all his ducks in a row. However, In this debate he didn't have a good response as to why the rich man supports his view. I know he says the story is talking about a different event which is the intermediate state but why does this intermediate state have fire?? It therefore support james view that the final eternal state is a continuation of the intermediate state. Secondly, Chris doesnt address revelation 14:11 how it says the unbelievers will have NO REST DAY OR NIGHT. Thirdly, when he talks about fire consuming the unbelievers he says the fire burns up and annihilates rather than tortures and keeps alive forever, however, this fire hes talking about is the fire on the day of the lord which is a different event than the final state. Of course the fire will destroy, this fire kills but what happens after the people die from that fire is the question. Chris is mixing up the fire from Hell and the fire from the day of the lord. To conclude: Whats the logic behind being conscious in the intermediate state??? The logic is that consciousness exist even after biologically dying. So why would Chris say consciousness wont exist for those who will die from the fire of the lords wrath??? Also Chris said in his debate that christ died and lost consciousness yet he believes Christ is God. This is a contradiction because God cant loose consciousness.

[@Vinylfiend60]

@@exclusive_148 All points you need to address to Chris. I’ve heard him answer some of those questions. I’ve never seen him not rise to the challenge so put your questions to him. I think he will honestly answer them. If he can’t answer them he will say he can’t answer them.

[@frankcostello2973]

I always have a problem with this for I would not want my worst enemy to suffer eternal torment

[@jasonhutchins8481]

You wouldn’t want someone to pay for what they’ve done?

[@hisservant222]

These are words from the Lord Jesus against eternal torment doctrine kzbin.info/aero/PLuLHwHqFIBP_6WJYBIjjPfXLiPxeMaoIi&si=FB-tIikI6VUl4ZKa

[@goziah]

@@jasonhutchins8481yes, by death. The wages of sin is death. Jesus undeservedly took the punishment we deserve, death, so that we may have eternal life. Hint, he didn’t suffer eternally.

[@JaraChristian]

Yeah, but it should be a just paying.​@@jasonhutchins8481

[@Steve_the_lion1075]

@@jasonhutchins8481 So would you support people being burned at the stake for breaking the law?

[@funtimefreddy4204]

1:02:57 Debate over. It’s all you need really. Chris makes an excellent point; if death means spiritual death, it implies that the spiritually dead were spiritually alive again for a second spiritual death, meaning every passage described as “Death” is the plain understanding of the meaning. Debate over.

[@cliff638]

28:50-29:21 It seems a bit ironic to me that the guy in favor of eternal conscious torment finds it "unjust" for someone in the "intermediate state" to suffer for thousands of years before being annihilated vs. the person dying closer to Jesus' return being annihilated sooner due to his/her closer proximity to Judgement Day. His wonderful solution is, of course, eternal conscious torment, where every person who doesn't believe as he does is tortured forvever. However, even in his ECT scenario, those dying thousands of years ago would suffer for eternity PLUS their time in Hades/Sheol. So all he's done is to make the alleged problem with Chris' position eternally worse.

[@MessyLittleFoodie]

I'm amazed with how much confidence verse after verse after verse is quoted in favour of ECT thinking it obviously proves it's validity when none of those verses actually say that. Classic example of eisegesis.

[@contemplate-Matt.G]

Chris Date is by far my favorite Calvinist. He's so dead on with the "hell" doctrine, I can't believe he's so wrong on the free will debate!

[@EssenceofPureFlavor]

I think the two are tied together. He knows God is good, but since in his mind not all are offered eternal life, this is how he reconciles the two views.

[@johnvirgilio5323]

You can't believe it because it's not true. He is right on both issues! (But that's a whole other debate.)

[@esdraskatumuako4838]

Maybe you're wrong :^)

[@contemplate-Matt.G]

@@esdraskatumuako4838 maybe I'm right ;)

[@contemplate-Matt.G]

Nowhere does the Bible teach man's actions are not his own...quite the opposite. Of course you can show a few instances where certain people act out prophecy. I agree. To win the debate though, you'll have to show that mankind on the whole is controlled and has no will of his own.

[@hopscotchoblivion7564]

Imagining that someone you judged as sinful is burning forever in Hell, while you wait to get to Heaven, is Pride.

[@Steve_the_lion1075]

What I've always found disturbing is how many Christians try to justify people being tortured forever, without end.

[@slasha2033]

My family sort of got mad at me because I opposed the idea of eternal torment and they looked at me with these sour faces like they want people to burn in hell. They have no scripture to back it up. I asked them what is the meaning of perish and what is the opposite of eternal life, they're just twisting scripture to fit their own belief system.

[@basedmathh]

​@ELUSIVE because ceasing to exist isnt a punishment...thats just dandy? Im not wedded to either belief, ceasing to exist isnt much better imho than eternal torment. Both sound awful.

[@basedmathh]

@@MaryMay-h5r yeah i suppose it depends on what if anything makes you happy. I feel like too many people do not fund fullfillment in things, like for me intellectual matters are good, adrenaline is great, friendships/relationships are great...but it is an idosyncratic advantage...perhaps in time others can have the genetics changed to accomodate the preferences

[@bwc6520]

​@@basedmathhsame

[@cryptojihadi265]

That's what's scary AF. ECT not only blasphemes God's name, it keeps people from the Kingdom and does SERIOUS harm to OUR psyches. Turns US into sadistic psychopaths.

[@AURush95]

@elusive4072 there are exactly zero scriptures that "clearly portray the conscious torment of sinners in Hell". You are reading your predisposition into the text. It is a possible interpretation of what the text alludes to. It IS NOT clearly portrayed. If you must have conscious torment for eternity in order for God to have justice and glory, there is an issue there. God is just and glorious no matter what humans think happens or wish to happen, and that goes both ways.

[@EricBaxter-f2k]

I’m glad all of these young men are willing to debate Chris on this subject. Definitely. Not an issue we should devide over ! With all of the highly symbolic apocalyptic and hyperbolic language concerning judgment’ we need to exercise, great patience with others, that hold different views as Chris lays it out this does not affect the doctrine of the fact that Christ is fully man and fully GOD ‘ and ever since incarnation, never ceased being both! He’s also a five-point Calvinist, and he makes it clear argument that this does not affect the atonement! Scripture clearly states that those who trust in Christ will be saved! In light of him paying the death penalty that sin requires ‘ romans6:23 - what convinced me about conditional immortality eternal life “is that it’s a gift from God, not given to the wicked’ when the apostle Paul states in first Corinthians 15, that this mortal must put on immortality, he’s speaking in reference to the redeemed!/ man does not have an imortal soul/ God will give the Christian immortality at the resurrection Roman’s 2:7😊

[@changjsc]

Writing a paper on this, so I really appreciate this video! Chris Date's skill in rhetoric and clarity is much better in my opinion. I am still sifting through the actual arguments; it's hard to separate the arguments from the rhetoric.

[@hisservant222]

kzbin.info/aero/PLuLHwHqFIBP_6WJYBIjjPfXLiPxeMaoIi&si=1HbgkaL-sM4xCekR

[@gngraves]

Personally , I think the way so many christians cannot wait to see non believers tormented forever is pretty sick. In fact I think it's sinful. I had one woman told me that if there is not eternal torment, What incentive do people have to turn from their sin? So the assumption is That being in hell for a long time before the second death and the lake of fire would be pleasant , I guess. Separation from god forever would be pleasant? Perishing feeling yourself and your soul die the second death would be pleasant? No I truly think it will be horrific. But even john three sixteen tells us that they will perish. It says that throughout the bible. I want to know how these 6 psychopaths think that they would have no more tears and feel totally fine. Knowing that many of the people they loved during life are being tormented forever? These are people who call themselves Christians who think they would be totally at peace , knowing that people they loved are being tormented forever and ever. It's as if they have given this no thought. Or perhaps some people are attracted to christian faith because they like the idea of harming their enemies. So they love the faith for the wrong reasons. They believe it will be used for their own personal vendettas. Again a completely wrong motive if that is the case. And then I wonder if that person who is is in the faith for that reason is even a true believer at all. Because with that much hate in your heart how can you be?

[@theidolbabblerthedailydose33]

Watching this debate, Chris Date gives a great way to understand dying. When something dies, they "cease to function." Think about how important this is to understand... When Adam and Eve ate they ceased to function in the capacity that they had been functioning. Adam and Eve now (for the first time) hid from God when they heard Him walking in the garden. This is not how it normally was prior... everything changed. They now ceased to function as those who walked with God... they hid from Him, they died... Genesis 3:8 (HCSB) Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden at the time of the evening breeze, and they hid themselves from the Lord God among the trees of the garden. And... when they were separated from the tree of life, it guaranteed that they would later die physically (cease to function in the fullest sense). Genesis 3:23-24 (HCSB) So the Lord God sent him away from the garden of Eden to work the ground from which he was taken. He drove man out and stationed the cherubim and the flaming, whirling sword east of the garden of Eden to guard the way to the tree of life.

[@ManlyServant]

ahaha your verses is just proving martin,how can adam whom God say to him "Today you will surely die" and yet he still working?,thanks

[@JosiahFickinger]

I find it ironic that Traditionalists think Biblical death is purely figurative and that it teaches fire is literally eternal whereas annihilation teaches biblical death is purely literal and the language describing hell is mostly figurative.

[@laurakosch]

Good summary!

[@frankcostello2973]

for God gave His Son Jesus Christ that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have everlasting life shall not perish shall not perish shall not perish

[@ricoyochanan]

Soft on sin. Yes, sin is bad, but not that bad. Questioning God's judgment on sin was Satan's first lie: Gen 3:1 Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” Satan inserts doubt, and then adds the lie: Gen 3:4 But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. This is the equivalent of saying you will not suffer eternally, but will be annihilated. Softball Christianity, to make Jesus more palatable to the woke world. Jesus will have none of it: 2Th 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 2Th 1:8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 2Th 1:9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; Jud 1:7 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.

[@AveChristusRex]

Judith 16:20-21 Woe be to the nation that riseth up against my people: for the Lord almighty will take revenge on them, in the day of judgment he will visit them. 21 For he will give fire, and worms to their flesh, that they may burn, and may feel for ever. Mark 9:44-47 And if thy foot scandalize thee, cut it off. It is better for thee to enter lame into life everlasting, than having two feet, to be cast into the hell of unquenchable fire: 45 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished. 46 And if thy eye scandalize thee, pluck it out. It is better for thee with one eye to enter into the kingdom of God, than having two eyes to be cast into the hell of fire: 47 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished.

[@WilliamTanksleyJr]

Judith was poorly translated into Latin (we have older Greek and Hebrew) -- the expression "feel forever" should be rendered "realize the coming age." It's not the same phrase rendered "forever" in the rest of the Bible, and the word rendered "feel" is nowhere else translated to refer to experiencing something, but rather coming to know it. Matthew is translated well, though. But look at what it's saying, directly: it doesn't say hell is worse than the pain of cutting your foot off. It says hell is worse than entering the Kingdom without your foot. In other words, Chris is right: hell is about losing your entire body (and soul) by destruction, not about torment.

[@theneverending9319]

Weird you are quoting judith instead of Isaiah which is what Jesus is quoting.

[@AveChristusRex]

@@theneverending9319 Judith is more explicitly about torment and the everlasting nature of said.

[@hisservant222]

kzbin.info/aero/PLuLHwHqFIBP_6WJYBIjjPfXLiPxeMaoIi&si=1HbgkaL-sM4xCekR

[@Tdahl1961]

James admits that "Angels can't die". So when the wicked are thrown into the lake of fire that was made for the Devil and His angels, they, being mortal/unregenerate can be burned up / destroyed

[@theundeservedflavor]

"These passages are clear..." 😂 As we debate over different interpretations of the passages.

[@DavidGuess-uq1ue]

I think its safe to say Chris killed it on that one or did he annihilate it lol 😆

[@ManlyServant]

Martin killed it 😂,martin annihilate him 😂

[@ByzBap]

@@ManlyServant Not even close

[@JasonJohnSwartz]

😄😁

[@JasonJohnSwartz]

@@ManlyServant your kind. Atleast one person in comments is on his side lol

[@EmeraldPixelGamingEPG]

@@ByzBap Please point out where he failed.

[@realnazarene5379]

Also just as Adam and Eve lived finite lives because God kept them away from the tree of life, so too are we when we meet the Lord. He is the tree of life. Those who partake of His fruit and bask in His glory will have eternal life. The others will be denied and thrown out into outer darkness where they will be consumed with regret and despair. Their torment will fit their finite transgressions and then they’ll be burned up. That’s the second death. Why insist on a position that paints God as a cruel monster who would torment sinners for all eternity for their finite sins. Why else would God bother keeping us from the tree of life if not to limit our potential for sin? If not for keeping us redeemable; unlike Satan for instance?

[@gngraves]

James is hard to listen to because it sounds like he's constantly whinning. But apart from that , when you talk about the plain meaning of the passage , you're talking about what you were taught. Like most americans , we are clearly taught eternal conscious torment as a way of manipulating the masses. Whether your catholic or protestant this is the common teaching. So the plain meeting of the passage goes back you're inductination And conditioning to believe something before you were even old enough to think for yourself. That does not make it the plane meaning. That's manipulating children before they're old enough to make a decision and be able to analyze something.

[@danielcrowell8143]

How can we get the truth if there are so many ways to interpret the Bible?

[@creed5305]

Context is KEY. And the holy spirit gives understanding to those he chooses.

[@plumber1874]

@@creed5305 does the bible say who He chooses?

[@josiaseverett5677]

@@plumber1874 God chooses those who choose Him

[@followhim1203]

@@plumber1874 Matthew 7:7

[@davidvenz237]

We can know the truth. We just need to put aside all our presuppositions and traditions and let scripture speak for itself.

[@Paddedcell.]

Genesis 3:4- And the serpent said unto the woman, “Ye shall not surely die”. Human immortality was the first lie ever told...

[@BibleLosophR]

At 1:02:55 Chris says that the 2nd death can't be spiritual because the wicked are already spiritually dead. But (if i recall) he believes that Christians are spiritually alive proleptically. If so, then couldn't unbelievers be said to be spiritually dead proleptically too? Or at least in a preliminary way? In which case, doesn't that make room for a second spiritual death?

[@contemplate-Matt.G]

@@exploringtheologychannel1697 Not sure you guys are using the word "proleptic" properly. What Chris didn't harp on enough is that Greek dualism has no place in Christianity yet it's prevalent. God didn't breath Adam's "spirit" into Adam, God breathed His own LIFE into Adam and Adam "became" a living soul. So the equation for man is Body + Spirit = Soul. In other words, we don't have a soul.....we ARE a soul. The soul that sins shall DIE. At death, the body goes to the dust, for dust we are and to dust we shall return, and the spirit God gave goes back to Him. I have no idea when the idea that death is "separation" came in nor the idea of "spiritual death". Adam didn't die spiritually when he ate and he didn't lose fellowship with God evidenced by the fact that God sought Adam and clothed Adam. What Adam lost was the access to the tree of life where he could eat and live forever along with the pre-cursed garden. He was told that if he ate "in dying you shall surely die". In other words the day you eat, you will begin to die and eventually you will die. We call it mortality. God alone has immortality and we must "put on" immortality" at Jesus' second coming. The resurrection of the "dead" happens when Jesus returns. The DEAD in Christ shall RISE first. You see my friends, Jesus descends from heaven and we ascend from the Earth into the AIR. It's as Job wrote, "though worms eat my skin, in my flesh shall I see God". Job knew he would not see God until he was bodily resurrected. Remember, Paul told the Thesolonians not to weep for those who were "sleeping" in Christ. Why?...not because they were safe and sound in some secondary heaven but because if they believed God rose Jesus from the dead, God would also bring with Jesus out from the grave, those who slept. Jesus id the firtfruits of them that SLEEP and all believers are resurrected on the last day. If our so-called "spirits" soar to heaven at death, resurrection is totally unnecessary and what Paul said about the resurrection is a lie. He said that if there is no resurrection, those who have died are perished. This needs to be debated before what happens after one dies is debated.

[@minor00]

I've seen proleptic referring to an anachronistic use of what will be fulfilled or anticipative. Either way it would be referring to a one time death or life being so sure that it is can be said to already be true of us. Therefore if that was the argument, it wouldn't allow for a second death. Instead, I think James basically went with saying that the second death is a fuller experience of the same spiritual death, which Chris argued against.

[@bufficliff8978]

@@contemplate-Matt.GI know Paul said that hell was separation from God I THINK in 2 Thessalonians, so that's where the separation concept comes from

[@exclusive_148]

The point i think Chris makes which seems weak is that he says the wicked will experience pain temporarily and then cease to exist. Whats the point of dying, experience temporary pain, and then take the pain away by making the person loose consciousness. That temporary pain will mean nothing if the person ceases to exist. Why go through the temporary pain phase instead of just dying and ceasing to exist right away. It makes no sense.

[@collinchen5101]

Good point

[@collinchen5101]

I think this statement made up my mind.

[@jelohsimo2435]

Remember Sodom and Gomorrah? Why wouldn't just God kill them painlessly then, hmm? I think the logic is consistent, is it not?

[@dco8886]

Exactly. This thought is what keeps me believing 100% the conditionalist position. I struggle with it 😂

[@jaserader6107]

@@dco8886 this is a bad argument. It is still a punishment because you no longer exist while the rightous have eternal life.

[@funtimefreddy4204]

1:37:51 this is when you know you’ve believed way to figurative with your language in biblical interpretation. James literally asks the question “The contrast between Eternal Life is death. We all agree that Eternal Life is escatalogical, so what is death?” Um… Death? As used literally? Like, how we all understand it?

[@The_Scouts_Code]

"this is the most organised thing we've ever done" @7:30 "yeah sorry guys i missed that" :P

[@timarnett672]

NOBODY, WHETHER THE DEVIL AND HIS HOST, OR THE LOST IS SUFFERING NOW IN A PLACE OF TORMENT. WHY? IT IS BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT YET BEEN JUDGED. THE BIBLE SAYS THAT ALL SHALL BE JUDGED ACCORDING TO THEIR WORKS, WHETHER GOOD OR BAD. LIKEWISE ALL SHALL RECEIVE THEIR REWARDS, WHEN THEY ARE GIVEN WHAT THEY DESERVE FOR THEIR WORKS, GOOD OR BAD. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THESE THINGS FROM SCRIPTURE?

[@jeffbiggs1994]

The skinny brother can’t seem to debate but he sure can read ,Chris Date wins this debate hands down ,God is Naomi a sadist

[@AnHebrewChild]

I'll post a parable here and *bold* a few places I find relevant to the discussion at hand: Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants. And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents. **But forasmuch as he had not to pay,** (he did not have sufficient means to repay what he owed) his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made. The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and **I will pay thee all.** Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt. But the same servant went out, and found one of his fellowservants, which owed him (only!) an hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, and took him by the throat, saying, Pay ME that thou owest. And his fellowservant fell down at his feet, and besought him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the debt. So when his fellowservants saw what was done, they were very sorry, and came and told unto their lord all that was done. Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, **and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.** So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses. __ Whatever this means, and whatever this looks like... I sure don't want to find out. > "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy."

[@theKpen]

Chris Date has said twice so far that Isaiah 33:14 implies the wicked cannot possibly dwell with or in everlasting burnings; but the text absolutely DOES NOT rule it out. A thief may lament, ‘who can possibly live in prison?’ - that does not in any way mean they won’t live in prison. Inability to conceive anyone can dwell in the burning anger of the almighty says nothing about whether sinners will or will not.

[@TheHellProject]

If you read around the verse you will see the implication that it is only the righteous that can survive in everlasting burnings.

[@Mrm1985100]

@@TheHellProject Mic drop.

[@ManlyServant]

@@TheHellProject Yup! "Everlasting Burning",Doesnt mean "Annihilate burning"

[@TheHellProject]

@@ManlyServant you've still missed the context of the passage. Who lives with the everlasting burnings? It isn't the wicked.

[@ManlyServant]

@@TheHellProject you keep bringing "context" and yet you didnt make any point,just admit it you are using your fEelInG,not scripture Isaiah 33:14-16 (NET) SINNERS are AFRAID in Zion; PANIC grips the godless. THEY say, ‘Who among us can coexist with destructive fire? Who among us can coexist with unquenchable fire?’, The one who lives uprightly and speaks honestly; the one who refuses to profit from oppressive measures and rejects a bribe; the one who does not plot violent crimes and does not seek to harm others, THIS is the person who WILL live in a SECURE place; he will find SAFETY in the rocky, mountain strongholds; he will have FOOD and a constant supply of water. co-exist doesnt mean "In It",just like in new heaven and earth,there is ETERNAL BURNING AND CONSUME of those who are wicked,and yet the Good people CO-EXIST with them in different realm with God,Lake of fire is for the wicked,Im so glad that Jd martin DESTROYS Chris date in this debate WITHOUT interupting him,meanwhile chris date is always interrupting Martin and yet chris is still losing at Verses war

[@ibperson7765]

It’s tough when the position statement of one side is *a bible verse* (multiple actually). When you argue the unsaved will not be destroyed, you literally argue word-for-word against multiple verses. No I don’t think that “God will destroy that person.” (1 Cor. 3:17). That’s the traditional position. No I don’t think that “destruction” awaits false, greedy teachers (2 Pet. 2:3) No I don’t think that only the narrow gate leads to life. Nor that the wide gate leads to destruction Matt 7:13 No I disagree that “the wicked are no more…” (prov 10:25), and that “the wicked are overthrown and are no more…” (prov 12:7) Well they are not actually “CONSUMED” by the fire. (Heb 6:8, 10:7; Jude 7, cf. Isa 33:11) Ya know cuz it’s not as if “like smoke they vanish away” (Ps. 37:20); and “perish” (Ps. 37:20). Next you’ll say they are “suddenly destroyed”. Or even “completely destroyed”. And even “altogether destroyed”. He has to say “I disagree” to verses. Traditionalist view disputes those claims. And twenty just as clear.

[@bufficliff8978]

Destroyed doesn't mean death. Even on earth a body can be destroyed without death. Those proverbs aren't about the afterlife and thus can't support or deny any afterlife doctrine. In Exodus the burning bush was on fire but not "burned." (The big guy with the beard said that eternal hell had the belief of a physical body, which I hadn't heard before. I'm aware of the physical resurrection of the saved, but if you know if that's the same for the unsaved it would help me a lot if you'd point me to that bc I hadn't heard that before) There are Psalms which talk about the afterlife, but basically every line of that Psalm is about physical things and earthly experiences. I just read over it a few times; I didn't do a real study of it, but I don't see it being about the afterlife, especially with your pulling of proverbs as evidences. Other than references to the grave and punishment you won't find much in the OT about the afterlife for unsaved souls. There's barely anything about the afterlife for SAVED souls. Just don't be cocky and wrong. Don't be cocky at all, but if you're going to be then be cocky and right. It's imprudent to use proverbs as proof of vague doctrines because that's not proverb's point or purpose.

[@ibperson7765]

@@bufficliff8978 Ive read and prayed and disagree. Good luck and God bless

[@joecheffo5942]

@@bufficliff8978 It a human body is literally destroyed it means death. Other meanings are metaphoric, wouldn't you say? Like, my football team got destroyed. When they say, in a science lab, the lab rats were destroyed after the experiment it means killed. Or the fertility clinic, the eggs were destroyed at the persons request. What stronger word can be used?

[@DavidGuess-uq1ue]

I use to be a traditionalist but I believe I've been shown that scripture does not actually point to that although at first glance it does seem to point to the traditionalist view but now I believe it points death to the unsaved eternally which is the conditionalist or annihilationist view so can't say I'm traditionalist any more I'm now convinced scripture points to conditional immortality and annihilationism.

[@ManlyServant]

you left traditionalism because you have deny this based upon your feeling before you open your bible and mentalize this,right

[@Shotzzilla]

Well you come to the right conclusion welcome to the camp ⛺️

[@Shotzzilla]

@@ManlyServant you haven’t studied your Bible enough clearly….

[@jnau8196]

I find it increasingly difficult to understand why annihilationists will believe that no person will be made eternal, yet worms will be made eternal.

[@NorthernNessa]

Can anyone explain Acts 2:24 and Jesus being raised by God “ending the agony of death”? I’m almost convinced CI is biblical but this one isn’t covered directly by Fudges book

[@IsaacNussbaum]

This excerpt from Ellicott's commentary might help, Vanessa. _"The word for “pains”_ ["agony" in some translations] _"is the same as that for “sorrows” in Matthew 24:8 : literally, travail-pangs. The phrase was not uncommon in the LXX. version, but was apparently a mistranslation of the Hebrew for “cords,” or “bands,” of death. If we take the Greek word in its full meaning, the Resurrection is thought of as a new birth as from the womb of the grave."_

[@NorthernNessa]

thank you @@IsaacNussbaum

[@Lloyd.B.]

I think you should have alternated the verses; instead of doing all 3 in a row for each. Debate formats leave much to be desired. I think just an open discussion back and forth, with some loose structure probably is better most of the time, because you can get to the points of contention quicker, and can concentrate on them, rather than monologue after monologue where nothing ever gets really unpacked and dealt with deeply... Ideally you want to have back and forth, rebut after rebut, until you have both sides expressing their very best argument for a point, so we can choose which one sounds right, sounds most biblical; and then move on to another point instead of going around in circles. At around the 50:00 point they get into some decent back and forth, I like that, it seems to process things much better. My memory is bad so when people start laying out tons of points one after another I give up trying to process it. Having a moderator that knows the subject well and can keep people on the point of contention is very helpful, and knows when to let the debaters carry on and when to step in and knock them back on course.

[@melanieanderson7166]

Verse Rev 20:10, I think this verse says that at the time of this verse that the lake of fire is where the beast and the false prophet currently were (because it says "they" for the devil, the beast, and the false prophet, not just the beast was in there at this time). If the lake of fire is a place that basically immediately consumes or very quickly consumes like a furnace, like a fairly quick burning up, how were the beast and the false prophet in the lake of fire at the time of this verse when they were thrown in there at least 1000 years before at verse Revelation 19:20. Please reconcile these verses for me.

[@trina2100]

Good point

[@theneverending9319]

You are reading symbolism literally. Do you also think a woman will be standing on the sun clothed in the moon or that locust will have the literal faces of men and hair of women?

[@ManlyServant]

@@theneverending9319 there is no problem reading it literally,because this is consistent with gospel itself

[@vc8749]

If you were thrown into a black hole you would no longer exist in any meaningful way but anybody talking about you after the fact would probably still refer to you as "being" there. I imagine the same thing is happening here.

[@escapethematrix40]

Good point!🤔👍

[@supersilverhazeroker]

there's nothing unjust about one being in hell for 5000 years and another for 5 minutes pre-annihalation. cause if you cease to exist you might just as well have never existed in the first place, so anything that happened might as well never have happened. so if your destiny is already determined when you die, why resurrect at all if you are going to be annihilated anyway? i really hope annihilationism is true, cause i don't want anyone, not even adolf to suffer for all eternity because of something they did in this short life, but Gods will be done, or rather his justice will be carried out.

[@Loislikes]

The entire purpose of our existence is for us to be eternally living with God. So it is NOT normal or natural for us to be annihilated or destroyed or removed from the Father's presence. That is what I would say as an argument. That is why Eternal Life being a great Gift from God, is in fact a wonderful gift.

[@theneverending9319]

One issue is James argues revelation isn’t arguing for a 1 for 1 correlation in the symbolic meaning and yet that’s exactly what he does for the torment language in revelation.

[@julietrae8665]

WHATS UP BUD? I SEE YOU ON HERE ALL THE TIME. JUST WANTE TO SAY HEY, AND SEE YA SOON..MONDAY, RIGHT?

[@AtheismActually]

RE: Annihilationism Why would the fire need to be eternal and the worm undying if there will be a Last Judgement at some point in the finite future, after which a new, perfect creation will be realized with all the saved, a final batch of damned will be dispatched to annihilation, and no further condemnations will be issued? What's the point of a fire and worm that just burn and writhe eternally then?

[@cryptojihadi265]

Simple God is an eternal all consuming fire. That's what He burned Sodom with. It's not still burning, but the fire is eternal. Another way to look at it is the sun will burn for 5 billion more years, but is there any doubt nothing would take more than a split second to be utterly consumed by it.

[@NorthernNessa]

I think they would say it is symbolic of a final judgement, never to be reversed. There are not literal eternal worms.

[@joecheffo5942]

The fire in Sodom and G was said to be never ending put clearly it has ended. Also the Old Test God speaks of the worm that doesn't die and the fires that are no put out, but that refers to the soldiers killed on the field. Worms and fires are not still going on there either.

[@michaelnewzealand1888]

The point of that passage in Isaiah 66 is to indicate that the worms and fire both completely consume the dead bodies. For example if the worms died and the fire was quenched then the dead bodies would not be destroyed but this is an example of them being completely destroyed since they are dead they're not eternal they're not conscious and they're not being tormented.

[@funtimefreddy4204]

I notice this debate always turns into the same thing; the definition of spiritual life and spiritual death vs physical life and physical death. Personally, as someone who has seen many debates around this topic, the reason it always turns into that is because the traditionalist argument ONLY WORKS if the description of death is spiritual death. (In which it doesn’t work at all because the spiritually dead cannot spiritually die a second time in the second death)

[@Loislikes]

It says in Revelation that the graves gave up their dead for judgement and than were give a second death. It makes little sense to say the death was only physical when you are ALREADY DEAD, you only have your spiritual essence left. So how can you experience a 2nd death? Clearly the spiritual death is all that is left. It isn't talking about physical here. And why would God say 2nd death, when talking to human beings that only know death as physical.

[@funtimefreddy4204]

@@Loislikes They gave up their dead because they resurrected. ALL PEOPLE will resurrect (Acts 24:15, Daniel 12:2) some to immortality and others to mortality (1 Corinthians 15:50-55)

[@Loislikes]

@@funtimefreddy4204 You are missing my point. A unbeliever is already spritually dead. And when they die they are already dead when meeting Jesus. SO AGAIN, why would Jesus raise a body out of the ground just to kill it again, but then remain the fact that they aren't dead, but still alive in torment. You are not making sense. How can you kill something that is already dead, and how can you torment something that is supposed to be dead.

[@Loislikes]

@@funtimefreddy4204 This is why "the 2nd death" is problematic. Because it litterally makes no sense to say that you go into torment, but are still eternally alive to receive that "2nd death". It isn't a 2nd death at all, but rather an eternal life of torment. It is in fact eternal life, because you are alive to experience the torment.

[@matthewkay1327]

Why would the damned get resurrection bodies?

[@matthewkay1327]

@elusive4072 fair reply thanks.

[@funtimefreddy4204]

To receive their punishment

[@AnHebrewChild]

I kept checking my playback speed to see if it was set to 1.25 or even 1.5... but no, 'normal.' Chris just talks fast. Micro Machines ® should give him a contract ;)

[@theone1535]

I would agree with Chris but my only problem is with the people who have had a NDE and claimed that it felt like" eternity" i could simply shrug it off like it's nothing but the fact that most people experience the same kind of hellish NDE is troublesome . If someone has a logic explanation to this I'm willing to hear it . I have a hard time believing that hell is for ever

[@vc8749]

What those people experienced would be Hades, not Hell. Hell is where the damned meet their ultimate end. Hades is their waiting place before judgement day.

[@Shotzzilla]

NDE IS NOT BIBLICAL. EVERYONE WHO DiES SLEEPS LIKE LAZARUZ. NDE IS WHERE PPL DODNT FULLY DIE ITS MORE LIKE A DREAM STATE. THE BIBLE MAKES IT CLEAR THAT WHEN WE DIE ITS LIKE GOING TO SLEEP IN HADES THE GRAVE PERIOD….

[@Brenemn]

Hey The one! I've been going deep down this rabbit hole of conditional immortality + NDEs. From what I've gathered, any NDE is not a true representation of the afterlife. For example, people in Eastern people will see theological figures they are familiar with. In Western, we're very familiar with Jesus and God, so many see visions relating to the Christian Faith. I am still internally debating on my stance (90% convinced of conditional immortality), but if that is the case, when we die, we're dead. For 1 year, 10 years, 10000000 years, however long until God returns to Earth for the resurrection of the dead, which will be the first thing we see after true death. I believe in NDEs we see what we expect to see in a sense - someone with a strong sense of guilt will see visions of torment, and in Western culture, that is Hell. Christianity holds the belief that none of us deserve saving, which manifests in end of life experiences expecting to be punished. Though I cannot disprove all these visions as untrue, they can't all be true. No one has ever truly come back from the dead so we never can know. Good Bless!

[@ThemCoversMB]

Ppl of other religions hv visions or nde of their religions afterlife. These experiences aren't reliable. The story of rich man and lazerus that tks place in the intermediate state which is a parable contradicts the number of scriptures depicting being jn a sleep in the intermediate state. So that also quite possibly is just a parable.

[@stevewhite8943]

So the Greek word translated forever is eon, which actually means a fixed period of time, not an unending period. The problem is in the translation, as I understand it.

[@celestialmangos8537]

I’m so confused about what Chris’s deal is with Matthew 10:28. He keeps emphasizing that the word destroy means “kill”, and not “eliminating from existence”. How does the latter refute or change his position? Does he not believe body and soul would be wiped from existence in hell?

[@cryptojihadi265]

Lol. That's the ONE thing he says that makes no sense to me either. Kind of drives me nuts.

[@jeffbiggs1994]

You know that most Christians who will never go to seminaries, if they pray about this and let The spirit of God lead you into all truth you will know that a Holy Almighty loving God would not let sinners just scream in agony for eons upon eons , I think His justice will be satisfied after some get beat with few stripes and some with many and then do away with them

[@deeveevideos]

1 Timothy 4:10 - The New International Version (NIV) 10 That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.

[@emmanuelmakoba6085]

Chris needs to not take so much offense. I was also lost as James was at times (At some of Chris' pushbacks on language)

[@melanieanderson7166]

Question for James and Chris but trying to assume the traditional view: Text Matthew 5:29-30. If conditional immortality is correct and hell consumes completely and renders a being non-existent then what would it matter if you entered hell with a whole body or not. If you throw something into a furnace the outcome is the same whether you throw a whole body, half a body or just a single limb, the end result is the same. They all completely disentegrate. So how does any type of betterness make sense in Jesus statement. I don't see the point of Jesus specifically saying whole body in hell. It could have be whole, half, or part and there would have been no difference. Please offer explanation.

[@tessajung6926]

The verse is pretty clear. Better cut of your hand before it leads you to sin than be burnt with all your bodyparts in hell

[@ManlyServant]

@@tessajung6926 because in hell your body isnt going to be annihilated

[@chetanpaulr]

Instead of your whole being getting Annihilated, enter life now by cutting of those parts from your being that will get you Annihilated at the end It's like saying cut of that cancerous tumor now and live instead of keeping it and die. And by the way all this is metaphor for saying take out that sin and its ways out and choose life and live like Jesus sacrificially like a living sacrifice.

[@exclusive_148]

44:25: Chris says he agrees that "hell fire" is "eternal" but disagrees WHAT that fire does. my question is "what is that eternal fire" and what does eternal mean????

[@tquam]

"eternal fire" is an idiom. An idiom is created when you take two words that each have their own meaning but when you combine them, it creates a different picture than what the words mean standing alone. We know that eternal fire doesn't paint a picture of the length of the fire but instead the length of the destruction caused by the fire. How do we know that? Two passages from the Old Testament both use eternal fire and smoke that rises forever. One is Sodom and Gomorrah and the other is Edom. God destroyed both with eternal fire and yet if you go to those locations today there is no fire burning nor smoke rising. So is the bible wrong when it says they were destroyed with eternal fire and yet there is no fire there today? No. It's our understanding of what the idiom "eternal fire" means. So we can't make up our own meaning of what eternal fire means in the New Testament when we have examples of what it means from the Old Testament.

[@exclusive_148]

@@tquam Thats a good explanation, but how do you explain Rev 14:11 ? This passage does sound like its talking about a literal passage or else why would the verse say "And they have no rest, day or night" What else could not resting day or night mean? Surely if their destroyed quickly - not resting day or night wouldn't make sense in that application.

[@tquam]

@@exclusive_148 The way I explain it is to go back to the Old Testament again and let scripture interpret scripture. The phrase “there will be no rest day or night” for those who worship the beast seems to be another idiom. It follows a line of thought about the Israelites who had sinned and whose bodies “perished” in the wilderness. Hebrews 3:16-19 16 Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt? 17 And with whom was he angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies perished in the wilderness? 18 And to whom did God swear that they would never enter his rest if not to those who disobeyed? 19 So we see that they were not able to enter, because of their unbelief. Once again, God destroyed the wicked in the wilderness, and the destruction was so complete that the wicked would never “enter his rest.” Wouldn’t the phrase, “there will be no rest day or night” be another way of saying, that the wicked would never enter God’s rest? In light of how God uses idioms to describe His destruction in Rev 14:11, coupled with the hundreds of verses that suggest annihilation, I believe it’s very likely what is meant here. Hebrews 4:11 "Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will perish by following their example of disobedience. " Here it is again, contrasting “entering rest” so that you won’t have to perish! I don’t think it’s reasonable to take a few unclear, apocalyptic passages and use them to dismiss hundreds of crystal-clear passages like these examples: Psalm 37:20 - But the wicked will perish: Though the LORD's enemies are like the flowers of the field, they will be consumed, they will go up in smoke. Psalm 37:37-38 - Mark the blameless man, and observe the upright; for the future of that man is peace, But the transgressors shall be destroyed together, the future of the wicked will be cut off. Psalm 68:2 - May you blow them away like smoke-- as wax melts before the fire, may the wicked perish before God. Psalm 92:7 - Though the wicked sprout like weeds and evildoers flourish, they will be destroyed forever. These are clear. There isn’t any wondering what these phrases mean. Just my opinion. I could be way off but it makes sense to me.

[@funtimefreddy4204]

The word Aionios in Greek is flexible. Specifically, though, the use of “Eternal Fire” is in complete reference that the fire is coming from God himself. Because God is described as the Eternal God, the fire coming from God (Jude 1:7) is therefore “Eternal” to reference its coming from God.

[@tomidomusic]

*The Tree of Life and immortality' were taken away from man in Genesis 3:22, so the debate should begin there.* Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever-”

[@JasonJohnSwartz]

Does the debate moderator believe in ETC or Conditional immortality

[@TruthfromBibleMinistry]

I'm really surprised Chris didn't cover all the old testament verses covering the fate of the wicked.

[@danielcrowell8143]

This is one reason the Old Testament is not done away with. Second kings says the dead know nothing they do not go back to the house somewhere in the Bible it says king David sleeps and says will be resurrected in the days to come

[@jeffbiggs1994]

Sorry NOT A SADIST

[@matthewtull]

Honestly none of it matters from the outset as both of you think that God determined who to save and who to destroy from the start.

[@PeterProf7777]

The Bible teaches and advocates everything both negative and positive. Slavery and genocide are advocated in the Old Testament. God kills and advocates the killing of women and children. The laws of Moses are harsh. Stoning a person who works on the Sabbath was encouraged. Unconditional love was taught by Jesus. If you are more comfortable with anger, fear, and judgment, then you will focus on the parts of the Bible that condone anger, fear, and judgment. If you are more comfortable with unconditional love, then you will focus on the love taught by Jesus.

[@aidenhill960]

Try reading the book, "Is God a monster?". Lord Jesus bless you!

[@PeterProf7777]

@@aidenhill960 No desire to. I am fine with my beliefs. God is not a monster of course, but the people who wrote the Bible had issues.

[@ThePreacherman9]

idk how many times Chris honestly interrupted over and over and over its annoying

[@allenellsworth5799]

If God is omnipresent how is he not also in Hell. Isn't he either there or not omnipresent.

[@ABC123jd]

God is not omnipresent in the Bible.

[@allenellsworth5799]

@@ABC123jd Exactly!

[@toughbiblepassages9082]

It’s very easy to see Date is a skilled orator, but we shouldn’t be swayed by rhetoric, but rather the logic of the argument. At 51:00 Date himself seems to grant weight to the fact that “eternal punishment” does not register well with annihilationism.. for if there is no conscious experience to be had, then the punishment would not be eternal.. he says “punishment” could just mean “death” and tries to underpin this by saying that “the punishment is clearly death, not life forever in torment”… except for the fact that the Bible never describes experiences in hell as “life” at all, rather it is always described as “death”.. in other words, consciousness in hell IS what it means to be in spiritual death, according to wording of the Bible. There are other factors that make Dates arguments fall short imho, but I thought it was worth noting Date gave some ground away on that point.

[@JohnBrodt]

To all God fearing Jesus loving brothers and sisters may the Grace and Peace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Act 17:11 Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. Let me be perfectly clear. We do agree that there is a literal “hell”, that it is very real, and all that reject Christ end up there. However we disagree on the function and purpose of “hell”. Hell is not a place for endless tormenting. It is a place for the soul to be burned up, and destroyed like Jesus said God can do in Matthew 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.” These are the words of Jesus, oh and it was NOT a parable.” Gen 3:2-3 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”. Question: Did Adam and Eve know for sure what it meant to die? Or was God not clear to them? Did God say Die, or did God say live in torment forever? Could it be that they did not understand this very important issue? Before they reached a sinful state, they must have been very intelligent, and in no way could they have misunderstood what death meant coming directly from God. Gen 3:4 “You will not surely die,” the serpent said to the woman. Statement: The serpent is the one claiming that Adam and Eve are eternal, not God. God said you will die, and the serpent is saying that you won’t die. Who are you going to believe? The father of lies, or the Author of life? 1 Tim 6:15-16 which God will bring about in his own time-God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who ALONE is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Genesis 3:19 By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you ARE and to DUST you will RETURN. Genesis 3:22 And the Lord God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must NOT be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, AND LIVE FOREVER. JB's Notes: If the soul was eternal then why did God order this? There would be no point in the order. The Lord God did not want man to eat from the tree of life so that he would NOT live forever in his sinful state. Hence he put cherubim and a flaming sword to guard the way to the tree of life. This seems pretty serious here for God to do this, and it should be very clear what God says about eternal life. Exodus 22:20 Whoever sacrifices to any god other than the Lord must be DESTROYED. Job 9:22 It is all the same; that is why I say, 'he DESTROYS both the blameless and the wicked.' JOB Chapter 20:4-9 Surely you know how it has been from of old, ever since man was placed on the earth, that the mirth of the wicked is brief, the joy of the godless lasts but a moment. Though his pride reaches to the heavens and his head touches the clouds, he will PERISH FOREVER, like his own dung; those who have seen him will say, 'Where is he?' Like a dream he flies away, no more to be found, banished like a vision of the night. The eye that saw him will not see him again; his place will look on him no more. Job 37:23 The Almighty is beyond our reach and exalted in power; in his justice and great righteousness, he does not OPPRESS. PSALM Chapter 6:4-5 Turn, O Lord, and deliver me; save me because of your unfailing love. No one REMEMBERS you when he is dead. Who praises you from the grave? PSALM Chapter 7:5 Then let my enemy pursue and overtake me; let him trample my life to the ground and make me SLEEP in the dust. Selah. PSALM Chapter 22:29 All the rich of the earth will feast and worship; all who go down to the dust will kneel before him-those who CANNOT keep themselves ALIVE. JB's NOTES: Are you awake yet? You can not keep yourself alive, only God can do that. And if you can not keep yourself alive that means you can not be eternal if you have rejected Jesus who is our salvation! PSALM Chapter 37:1-2 Do not fret because of evil men or be envious of those who do wrong; for like the grass they will soon wither, like green plants they will soon DIE AWAY. PSALM Chapter 37:10 a little while, and the wicked will BE NO MORE; though you look for them, they will not be found. PSALM Chapter 37:20 But the wicked will PERISH: The Lord's enemies will be like the beauty of the fields, they will vanish - vanish like smoke. PSALM Chapter 37:35-36 I have seen a wicked and ruthless man flourishing like a green tree in its native soil, but he soon passed away and was NO MORE; though I looked for him, he could not be found. PSALM Chapter 37:38 But ALL sinners will be DESTROYED; the future of the wicked will be cut off.

[@davidvenz237]

James lost his fire and Chris fired up. I have recently been questioning the traditional view of hell and eternal punishment and Chris makes a lot of very compelling arguments.

[@davidvenz237]

@@gustavmahler1466 Christ is our hope for eternity. If we are in Christ, we will not see torment or death. That is the promise of the Gospel.

[@davidvenz237]

@@gustavmahler1466 The wages of sin is death yes,(Romans 6:23), but where does scripture ever say that the punishment must be "eternal' death? This is the great promise and hope that we have in Christ, that because He was resurrected, so to will all who are in Him. Whether death is eternal or not is up to God and He decrees that all who reject the son will be punished eternally. Your logic is grossly simplistic and wrong. Yes Jesus died, by the will of the Father, as the perfect sinless sacrifice, in order to abolish all other sacrifices for ever and He was resurrected by the will and power of the Father to be the first fruits of all who would be resurrected (1 Corinthians 15:20). If Jesus wasn't crucified and resurrected, then we have no hope.

[@davidvenz237]

@@gustavmahler1466 Why? That is not a logical statement. Again, nowhere in scripture does it say that death has to be eternal. It is, for the unrighteous. The death of the wicked is eternal because they are not given eternal life. The miracle of the incarnation of Christ is beyond our comprehension and to imply that God does not have the power to conquer death is downright heresy. You need to repent

[@davidvenz237]

@@gustavmahler1466 why must you keep labouring the point that death must be eternal. Jesus is God incarnate and He offered Himself as the perfect, sinless, once for all sacrifice for the sins of all who would believe in Him. Yes, He died but He was resurrected by the power of God for our justification. Because He was resurrected bodily, we have the hope of resurrection to eternal life in Him. He Lives so that we who are in Him will live. He conquered death. Why must you deny the very words of Christ Himself John 3:16 in particular, or even the teaching of the apostles Acts 2:36, 1Corin.1:23 I could go on. Give me a verse that says explicitly that death "must" be eternal. If Christ didn't atone for your sins on the cross of Calvary and rise again the third day for your sins, then where is your hope?

[@laurakosch]

That’s how I felt exactly two years ago. Then someone directed me to Edward Fudge. There’s a good KZbin movie - Hell and Mr Fudge that does a good job exploring this question.

[@danielcrowell8143]

Revelation 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

[@Shotzzilla]

We could just end the conversation right there. Oh but traditionalist will say it’s not really death it’s a spiritual death where they live on forever in flames 🔥 😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@funtimefreddy4204]

Death and Hades. Hades does not mean Hell.

[@BibleLosophR]

Regarding Isa. 33:14, the word "dwell" might have the connotation of pleasantly and prosperously inhabiting a location. As in Ps. 37:3 "Trust in the LORD, and do good; dwell in the land and befriend faithfulness" (ESV) ["cultivate faithfulness" NASB; "feed on His faithfulness" NKJV]. If so, then Isa. 33:14 wouldn't mean that the wicked cannot continue to exist in the "consuming fire/everlasting burnings", but that they will not prosper there or be in a blessed, blissful and contented state. So, the verse doesn't necessary count against Eternal Conscious Torment. If anything, it might imply ECT because it's a warning to avoid entering the horrific position of enduring "eternal/continual burnings" precisely because it goes on forever. It might be argued that the fire is also referred to as "devouring/consuming fire" and that would imply Conditional Immortality. But that can refer to the thoroughness of the (literal and/or figurative) fire's effect, not the literal effect. Otherwise, why refer to the fire as eternal/continual? The term "unquenchable fire" in other passages is consistent with CI as its advocates explain, but it doesn't settle the issue. Since, unquenchable is just as consistent with ECT. If not more so precisely because the wicked will endure the fire forever. Moreover, the point of saying the fire is unquenchable better fits with the idea and warning that it will continue burning forever and therefore sinners should beware, than the seemingly trivial and incidental fact that no one will be able to hold back God's and and stop God's judgment from being fully executed. First century Jews who believed in God's omnipotence wouldn't need to be told that.

[@basedmathh]

Neither sound like good options to me so I would prefer to trust in Jesus for my salvation. I think from my perspective it would be more comforting to know non believers just cease to be, but I know nothing weighed against an infinite mind.

[@juanitobarcelona7050]

God said to Adam ,if you eat the fruit you are going to die,but Satan said," NO" you are not going to die.

[@buffsoldierofchrist5907]

Chris date has really good points, i used to laugh at the position of annihilationism but now... it sounds more biblical. Also why would God punish us eternally if we live decades or so.. why punish temporerly sin with eternity? it doesnt really make sense. Well maybe im just loosing it.. glad that this is not a salvation issue lol.

[@claireashley427]

My question is this, why do we assume people who rejected Christ will suddenly stop sinning in hell so as to pay for their sins in a specific amount of time and be annihilated? It says there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. That is a metaphor for anger which is used in other parts of the bible. It makes sense to me that unbelievers who are suffering in hell would be cursing God continually therefore constantly racking up further and further punishment in hell. I would love to believe in Annhiliationism, who wouldn't? But why should we assume sinners who reject God there entire life would suddenly stop doing so when in hell?

[@buffsoldierofchrist5907]

Claire Ashley I don’t get your question? The answer to sinners in hell is quite simple. Immortality is only granted to believers. Disbeliever will never inherit eternal life! The wages of sin is death, the Bible also clearly talks about the second death. The gnashing of teeth appears many times in the Old Testament also. Psalms 112:10 The wicked will see it and be vexed, He will gnash his teeth and melt away; The desire of the wicked will perish. The Bible clearly talks about destruction and perishing for non believers. I don’t hold to eternal torment anymore. Again how can God be just and let sinners suffer an eternity for finite sin? Infinite punishment for finite sin is not just. The God that said eye for eye tooth for tooth etc. Also there are many more proofs just go and watch debates with Chris date and read books about it. Let the Bible speak for itself and don’t let tradition be final authority. I love God more now I know that annihilationism is more biblical then eternal torment.

[@claireashley427]

@@buffsoldierofchrist5907 I didn't ask for an answer to sinners in hell..that is quite clear. Maybe you need to reread my comment. Idk how else to word it really but I'll try.. if temporal sin requires a temporal punishment then annihilationism would make sense. However why do we assume nonbelievers stop sinning while in hell suffering? Wouldn't a nonbeliever who rejected Christ their entire life be cursing God and continue sinning in hell? Therefore continually be sinning and continually having to pay for their sins in hell? Their sin in hell in hatred and rebellion to God could go on forever therefore requiring eternal punishing not simply eternal punishment in being annihilated at some point. The point of weeping and gnashing of teeth is anger, the bible clearly says those in hell will do so, does that not show their anger towards God? At some point they will simply stop and be killed off? If they rejected Christ on earth which obviously is a walk in the park compared to hell, why in hell would they stop hating and cursing God continuing in sin forever?

[@FosterTheBullet1]

Claire Ashley where does it say weeping and gnashing of teeth = anger? To me it sounds more like extreme suffering. I don’t think, if someone rejected God and then had to endure that level of suffering, that they would continue to curse God. They’d be begging for mercy and to make the pain stop. If someone’s being burned alive i don’t think they’d be saying “F YOU!” to the ones who set them on fire, they would be screaming like nothing you’ve ever heard before. I find it very hard to believe that God would let anyone suffer to that extend for an UNLIMITED amount of time, especially someone who genuinely was a pretty good person, but just was an atheist. Have you ever gotten burnt by hot water or a hot pan or something like that? Imagine that, but x10000 and on your entire body. Do you really think anyone should have to endure that ENDLESSLY? All because they were born into a family and surrounded by people who weren’t christians?

[@claireashley427]

@@FosterTheBullet1 It's honestly a moot point because once in hell you don't get a second chance. Sure some would be crying out for Mercy but by that time it's too late, there is no repenting and turning from not believing and trusting in God to now deciding to believe him because you are being burned alive in hell and KNOW God is real because you've met him at the judgment seat and are now enduring his punishment. As far as the weeping and gnashing of teeth, we find it used in the story of the stoning of Stephen. The phrase was an expression of anger of the Sanhedrin towards Stephan prior to the stoning. As for one not growing up around believers or in a christian family and being an athiest..the bible says we are without excuse! The very creation itself points to God. We are all responsible and very able to come to the understanding that there is a God and to further research and learn what the truth is. We all have a God given conscience as well that tells us right from wrong, yet another clear fact that there is a God. You cannot have intelligent finite human beings without an intelligent infinite God. And no he doesn't need a creator because he is not within time and space, he is outside of it and created it. He created everything and we are all held accountable. God loves us and desires that none perish! His gift is a free one of everlasting life in his perfect presence. Everyone has sinned and is deserving of hell. No one deserves heaven and everlasting life. Those who don't accept the free gift go to hell and get justice. Those who accept the free gift are given grace. No one is getting injustice. God is a perfect judge and I trust that he knows what he's doing whether hell is eternal or whether it is for a certain period of time before everyone in it is ultimately destroyed completely. I believe the bible points toward the former but I am open to the possibility of annihilation and there are some good arguments for it. I just don't know. But I do know that if we don't accept the Saviors free gift of salvation who died to pay the price for our sins, we will pay for them in hell, at least for a certain amount of time which I believe will have no end, but I could be wrong. Thankfully I am saved by grace and my sins are paid for in full!

[@fredflintstone8048]

Tradition and human reasoning aside, what does the bible appear to say about the second death? Without enumerating the texts in this comment, annihilationism appears to me to represent the biblical position.

[@elizabethbanks6432]

Exactly

[@fredflintstone8048]

Another unpopular position to hold that I see throughout the pages of the bible is what is often called soul sleep. What this means to me is that when we die we are in a state that the bible repeatedly uses sleep as a metaphor, or analogy for. After death we are in an unconscious state until the resurrection. I believe that when Jesus told the thief on the cross that today he would walk with him in paradise I believe he was speaking from the perspective of the thief, and not about how time actually passes. In sleep we're not aware of the passage of time. For the thief he would die and in the next instant be with Christ, but this would be thousands of years later.

[@Shotzzilla]

Thank you tell that to 90% of the world lol

[@fredflintstone8048]

@@Shotzzilla I tell everyone who will listen to me when the topic arises, and 90% of the self professed Christians I talk to act appalled that I could think and speak this way even though I do it by quoting scripture. I've yet to meet any of them that can refute the position with actual scripture. I go confidently on my way feeling that I represented the word of God to the best of my ability. Of course if I'm really way off base in my interpretation of this in the bible I know that God will correct me somewhere along the way, but it hasn't happened yet.

[@bufficliff8978]

@@fredflintstone8048It's a reference to the physical--not the soul. The body sleeps the soul does not. Ecclesiastes and Job are not doctrines of the afterlife. Job is rebuked for being wrong on his assumptions; Ecclesiastes preaches to pursue only what is valuable--God--because anything else is worthless and will bring no reward. Also the end of Ecclesiastes preaches against soul sleep, that when a person dies the soul returns to its maker. Also take note of the verses that attest to life in the intermediate before the New Earth, the transfiguration two major biblical figures stood next to Christ in all His glorified radiance. People merely couldn't rebut because it's an obscure topic--not because soul sleep is true. There are more rebuttals today than there used to be because people are hearing about soul sleep for the first time basically bc of tik tok. Saved souls either went to paradise or heaven until the New Earth, and condemned souls either went to torment or hell before eternal hell or annihilation. The body sleeps as testament to the final resurrection; the soul goes to its maker or to punishment.

[@Jamie-Russell-CME]

interpretting the passage about soul and body is seperate from the doctrine in totality. Chris is saying the passage only says so much. You cant strawman his position on the total doctrine of CI onto his interpretation of a single passage. He is being precise. But some must put carts before horses in order to argue against the truth of the doctrine of CI. The body isnt harmed in the passage, it is killed. And it is contrasted with what God kills. Soul AND body.

[@zoranvanzindell]

I see you on every video comment. 😂😂

[@infoaddict2738]

How can I get in contact with Chris? Would like to talk to him about a biblically sound point that has come to life after hearing him argue conditionalist view on Capturing Christianity Podcast

[@JohnDoe-fr7fr]

Mind sharing it here? Would like to hear it.

[@robbiebobbie2011]

where does it say lazarus was saved and the rich man was not?

[@jasensargent6176]

The fact that he was in a paradise

[@BrutalCross]

@@jasensargent6176 If we are to take that parable as a literal story, then Lazarus was saved because of the mere fact that he was poor, not because he was Righteous and lived for God, no where in the story does it say Lazarus was Righteous or a saint. If we are going to take this story literally, then every homeless person, every poor person is saved whether or not they put there trust in Jesus.

[@jasensargent6176]

@@BrutalCross See Luke 6

[@davidvenz237]

He was with Abraham because he had the same faith as Abraham. The rich man was separated from Abraham because he did not have Abrahams faith. Their spiritual states were quite clearly implied. The question is irrelevant.

[@michaeldeo5068]

It's clearly Death not endless punishing! I would even hold out hope that even death cannot hinder the ultimate purpose of Yahweh!

[@tsapp2831]

Who's Yahweh?

[@theneverending9319]

That makes no sense. The punishment is eternal death that is scripture. The punishment is not getting to have eternal life with Jesus. The punishment is endless as long as they remain dead.

[@JengaJay]

@@tsapp2831 The name of our God

[@tsapp2831]

@@JengaJay hmmm didn't read that in the Bible

[@JengaJay]

@@tsapp2831 It's the name our God presented unto Moses in the Burning Bush Exodus 3:14 God said to Moses, “I am who I am.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel, ‘I am has sent me to you.’” אהיה אשר אהיה "I am who I AM" or in other words "YHWH" Now you know the personal name of your God, don't start saying it randomly though because the name of our Lord is sacred and people use to get stoned for blasphemy for saying his name in vain Respect it and Glorify him forever and ever, Amen!

[@dynamicloveministries334]

39:04 this is a very good example of somebody only being able to see what he believes. The problem here is ontology. The problem that I think people have is that they think they are spirits that lives in bodies which is not biblical. We can easily say my spirit, or my soul, or my body and it makes sense? Because we are none of it. Nobody goes around and say my human being do they? The reason why we don't go around say my human beings because we are human beings. The moment you realise that Jesus Christ came to save humans and not spirits the gospel start to makes sense. The greatest lie ever told is that man cannot die. It seems to me as if people are still believing that lie to the core.

[@solidfood]

THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST The Gospel of Christ amongst others teaches that YAHWEH is LOVE (1 John 4:8), sinners are at the hands of A Loving Father (Luke 15:11-24), and SALVATION is by GRACE, not by WORKS (Ep 2:8-9). Even with these three fundamentals thus position the Gospel of Christ in a complete opposition to paganism; and I know that those who are enslaved to any forms of paganism, either ancient or modern will surely curse this divine TRUTH. If only they were at the crucifixion scene in Calvary two millennia ago, they were surely in the crowd that were shouting and insulting Jesus! To the top of their voice they shouted, "Kill him, crucify him!" According to the Gospel of Christ, SALVATION means: "He will raise the believers at His Second Coming and then cloth them with immortality" (Jn 6:54; 1 Tes 4:14-17; 1 Cor 15: 42-55). This company of believers shall be ushered into His Millennial Kingdom (Rev 20:4-6), and then to the New Heaven and New Earth (Rev 21:1-5). After the Millennium there will be a White Throne Judgement and those names not written in the Book of Life shall be thrown into the Lake of Fire (Rev 20:11-15); where they will be refined by the Holy Fire of God (Heb 12:29), like the processes of refining gold and silver (in fire). "Some of those who have insight will fall, in order to refine, purge and make them pure until the end time; because it is still to come at the appointed time" (Daniel 11:35). To carnal mind Lake of Fire is HELL and the fire is literal. To the anointed mind Lake of Fire simply comprises of two things : LAKE and FIRE. Lake is just a large volume of water and water symbolises judgment (Gen. 6); as well as Word of God (Deu 32:2; Is 55:10) that cleanse our conscience (John 15:3; Ep 5:26). So is FIRE. It too symbolises judgment (Gen 19:1-29), and the Word of God (Jer 23:29). The Word of Yahweh clearly says that Lake of Fire is SECOND DEATH (Rev 20:14; 21:8). To carnal mind, Second Death is Eternal Death, i.e eternal tormentation in hell and eternal separation from God. However, the anointed mind perceives Second Death as 'a process of dying to sins and live to righteousness' (Luk 9:23; Gal 2:20). The believers had crucified themselves with Christ through FAITH (second death), but the non-believers have to go through the second death and second birth in the Lake of Fire. There will be volumenous teaching and learning pertaining to the Way of Righteousness in the Lake of Fire. However and finally they too were made holy and cleansed with water through the Word prior to being reconciled back to God. This is what a carnal and man-made religion fails to comprehend. "for when thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness" (Is 26:9). The purpose of Judgment is not to condemn, but for correction purposes. Thus in the Lake of Fire, the religious hypocrites, false teachers, false prophets and sinners at large will subject to rigorous and intense learning processes until "their knees shall bow and their tongues shall confess that Christ is Lord" (Phil 2:10-11). The carnal and man-made religions always potray God as Monster. They propogate that "His holiness overrides His other attributes. Thus though He is an All-Loving and All-Merciful, but at the same time is delighting in the suffering of hopeless sinners in hell." Truely ALL THINGS in heaven and on earth, the seen and the unseen shall be reconciled back to Yahweh at their appointed time (Kol 1:20). "As in Adam ALL die, so in Christ Jesus ALL shall be made alive" at their appointed time (1 Cor 15:22). Surely Jesus is The Savior of the World, and the WHOLE WORLD He will save. Of course there are orders of things. There will be the resurrection of all believers at Christ Second Coming (1 Test 4:13-17), the Millennial Kingdom, the White Throne Judgement for non-believers, the New Heaven and New Earth and New Jerusalem (Rev 20-22:2-4) and finally the Climax of the Ages or sometime also calls Ages of the Ages. (Concept is similar to 'Holiest of the holiest'). It is here (at the Climax of the Ages) that the prophecy which says: "every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Christ is Lord" ( Pill 2:10-11) shall be fulfilled. At this appointed time, those thrown into the Lake of Fire will finally learn the righteousness of Yahweh and will be ushered into the Climax of the Ages. The climax of the event, "Jesus will hand over the Kingdom to the Father and He becomes All in All and His glory fills the earth like the waters cover the sea" (1 Cor 15:22-28; Is 22:9).That's the gist of the Gospel of Christ, a Good News indeed to ALL MANKIND. Truly Yahweh is good all the time and no other gods/Allah can be compared to Him (Is. 40:25, 45:5). Praise be His Name. Amen.

[@williamrice3052]

Notice the rich man in hades did not call on the Lord (Jesus Christ) to be saved but Abraham, for best results call upon Jesus Christ for salvation, today, before leaving this world.

[@wwatkin21]

A few things I noticed about James. He was very prepared in his monologues but had trouble developing his thoughts in the rebuttals. While on the other hand Chris is much quicker off the top, organizing his thoughts better in real time. James was also very aggressive and condescending in his monologues as if he was at his wits end trying to explain to people that eternal conscious torment is just the truth and stop with the nonsensical annihilationism talk already. On top of that James is ticked off his points entirely too fast which for many viewers would make it difficult to understand his position. Winning debates is all about the perception that the debater can give to the audience. If you can be perceived as the winner your position most of the time will gain more popularity in the public sphere. Chris is levels more prepared than pretty much every debater he comes against which persuades perception. Chris has also raised a lot of very reasonable points that many pay people have never thought of before, whoever can do that the most in a debate will always be the winner. If you come to the stage and spill out a lot of the same logical points that most people have heard before more than likely you won’t persuade people.

[@zoranvanzindell]

God bless you brother's and sisters, can you pray for me thank you kindly may god bless you and this comment section:)

[@exclusive_148]

In around the 20min mark, Chris didnt address the issue of the intermediate state where one person could ve suffering for thousands of year while the other might only suffer 5mins before all unsaved people get annihilated. He responded by saying "the passage of time is different" WHICH IS NOT BIBLICAL??? WHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT TALK ABOUT THE INTERMEDIATE STATE PASSAGE OF TIME IS DIFFERENT??

[@JosiahFickinger]

Where in the Bible does it say there even is an intermediate state?

[@exclusive_148]

@@JosiahFickinger That's a good question, I think the term intermediate state refers to a period between death and resurrection of the dead. we could clearly see there are two events - the place one goes to after dying and then the place one goes to after resurrection. these two places are different that's why there is an "intermediate state ". in fact the person representing ECT see in this debate sees these two events almost as one, But it's Chris date that doesn't see it like that. Chris state basically argues that one goes to the intermediate state and then is annihilated or that there is no intermediate state and every passage referring to it is a hyperbole.

[@coryabouaf7713]

One concept not discussed is that hell and death are cast into the Lake of Fire which is why both souls and hell will be no more? Also, even though the best case for "INFINITE TORMENT" is Rev 20:10 that says that will suffer there day and night forever, we must remember a couple things. 1. Forever and ever in the Greek is "eons and eons" not infinitely. As well, "DAY AND NIGHT" will only exist for an indefinite amount of eons for And night will be no more. They will need no light of lamp or sun, for the Lord God will be their light, and they will reign forever and ever. Rev 22:5 and all of the old creation will pass away.

[@timbranton1709]

Moderators should not take sides as you did.

[@gustavmahler1466]

Do spirits in hell have tongues? Luke 16:24

[@creed5305]

No. The rich man and Lazarus is another parable. Jesus mentions the rich man as a nameless character while Lazarus has a name. This is cause the Rich man will be forgotten but Lazarus will be remembered. There are elements of this parable that make it obvious that it's a parable. For instance, you can't speak to Abraham while in "hell".

[@creed5305]

@@gustavmahler1466 read my first comment then get back to me.

[@TKK0812]

Luke 16 is speaking of hadés or Hades, the intermediate state. Luke 16 has nothing to do with Gehenna or the final punishment of the lost.

[@KKKaTTT123]

Apparently they have teeth and eyes to weep with

[@KKKaTTT123]

@@gustavmahler1466 yeah, i know

[@jeffbiggs1994]

The skinny feller is just reading

[@exclusive_148]

Matthew 13 and malachai 4: These passages talk about the day of the lord and what the lord will do. It doesnt specify annihilation nor eternal suffering.

[@claireashley427]

My question is this, why do we assume people who rejected Christ will suddenly stop sinning in hell so as to pay for their sins in a specific amount of time and be annihilated? It says there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. That is a metaphor for anger which is used in other parts of the bible. It makes sense to me that unbelievers who are suffering in hell would be cursing God and continuing to sin against him in their hated and therefore constantly racking up further and further punishment in hell. I would love to believe in Annhiliationism, who wouldn't? But why should we assume sinners who reject God their entire lives would suddenly stop doing so when in hell? (If all souls are immortal) Which by both the saved and non saved being resurrected shows at least all souls will at one time live on after death (regardless of how long that time is)

[@LMG705]

My thoughts as well Claire. You make a good point. The gates of hell are locked from the inside.

[@jnau8196]

The fires that an evil king made were hotter and more merciful than the fires of God? Why were men killed by drawing to near to the evil king's fire and the wicked have time to cry and gnash in God's fire before destruction? Is God less merciful than the evil king in the annihilation

[@jasensargent6176]

You should really get Dale Tuggy on here to debate Unitarianism.

[@vincentparrella272]

First off Eternal Fire is a metaphor,Hell is also referred to as outer darkness,if there's fire it would produce light.

[@JosiahFickinger]

True! "Outer darkness" could just be a figurative term for a place of emptiness, hopelessness and meaninglessness.

[@ericbrightwell1439]

Chris learn Greek, burn completely is kápste entelós, what did you say?

[@ThePreacherman9]

?

[@theshadowninja4223]

James said that him and the traditionalists aren't saying that the lost won't live forever in hell well Tatian was the first documented christian to believe in eternal torment said that the lost will be immortal and they will live forever in hell

[@ABC123jd]

And just using basic common sense, if someone is physically alive, breathing, and consciously aware in hell for all eternity, then that person is living forever in hell.

[@theshadowninja4223]

@@ABC123jd exactly

[@theshadowninja4223]

​@@ABC123jdI can take traditionalists seriously until they start talking about how they don't believe the lost will be immortal and live forever

[@melanieanderson7166]

Is the teaching of annihilationism for the purpose of being taught to saved persons or unsaved persons?

[@BibleMythBusters]

Conditional immortality is a Bible teaching for everyone. Jesus used the teaching (in Matthew 10) of annihilationism to warn the wicked.

[@dayrongarcia3862]

@@BibleMythBusters Warn the wicked of what? If I tell an atheist that he will be annihilated, he or she will laugh his or her way to the grave? Is that the worst God would do to a non-believer? An atheist believes the same, they will cease to exist, your not warning of anything. Separation from God? Well they are already separated from God, and they are ok with that. I'm not saying that annihilationism is wrong, I'm just saying it makes the gospel so much non urgent, that's my opinion.

[@blackout1628]

Dayron Garcia The thing is an Atheist lacks a belief in God. They don’t believe it’s the truth. But once He reveals himself there’s no telling how they would react. Jesus said there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. I would bet that there would be a lot of regret. No eternal torment is needed for that. Also there are people who sugar coat it and tell atheists that they will be eternally separated from God, they still react the same way. Still, it doesn’t change anything about the urgency of the gospel, especially since it’s the truth.

[@parkjob]

@@dayrongarcia3862 if we say hell is eternal they don't believe it, and if we say annihilation they say, meh not as bad. Bottom line is, neither tactic works lol.

[@cbtam4333]

@@dayrongarcia3862, some people may reject the gospel because they think annihilation will be no big deal. Others may reject the gospel because they don’t want to serve a God who tortures people for trillions of years. Still others couldn’t care less about ECT vs. CI because they think they will be able to meet up with their buddies in hell and party into eternity. The reason for taking a position on this issue should be based on what the Bible says rather than on what would best appeal to unsaved. The truth is what has the ability to set them free.

[@Theotherone2033]

start with the assumption that God created everything we know from the desire for relationships with other beings. Because a relationship is a shared experience, God alone could not experience a relationship until He created another being to do so with. God used logic when he considered characteristics to give the beings he would create. Before creation began He developed a logical plan for the creation to suit Gods purposes and the purposes of the creation. I have identified four characteristics that God used when creating other beings. First, the other beings must not possess omniscience. The reason why God would not create another omniscient being to relate with can be summed up by the following question. What would one omniscient being communicate to another omniscient being, that the former did not already know? There would be no reason for two omniscient beings to communicate with each other and because communication is the foundation of relationships, the other beings must not be all knowing. This is the real reason why there will always only ever be one God. The second characteristic is free will. Other beings must have the ability to reject the relationship that God desires. I won’t go into that much now but a lot can be said about that as I am sure you can imagine. The third characteristic is eternal life. Because God is eternal He wants to have relationships with other eternal beings. Anything short of eternity no matter how long would seem like a blink of an eye to God. The fourth characteristic was uniqueness. God doesn’t want to have the same relationship a million times so every being created would be different. With these characteristics God made angels first because God gets what God wants right away, which is relationship with lesser than, free willed, unique and eternal beings. I am gonna really sum this up brother but I have a lot to share. So this becomes a theodicy because I can explain how this existence is not exclusively what God wants it to be, it is a combination of what God wants it to be and what the free willed beings God created want it to be also. It is a compromise if you will, and everyone knows all relationships and love itself requires compromise. God created a plan where He would allow one sin in heaven, and there will never be another sin in heaven after the one is performed. This results in God giving an angel everything the angel wants except one thing, to become God. God explains lovingly, that is an impossible request because the angel was not created for that purpose and making the angel God would result in the inability to have a relationship which would defy the purpose of creating the angel. The angel decides if there can only be one God that, that he wants to kill God to become God. That was the one sin allowed and as a result the angelic rebellion was born. God knew that this would have to be dealt with unpleasantly and eternally because God already gave the angels eternal life and will not undue what He already has done. So God stopped making angels to limit the number of beings that would require eternal conscience suffering if they rebel. God made humans to be mortal for this purpose, people can choose to rebel against God for a limited period of time and then they just do not receive eternal life if they do. Those who demonstrate a willingness to not rebel during their finite lifetimes are rewarded with eternal life. Christian conditionalism!

[@stevendrumm4957]

It is possible that those who die shortly before Jesus comes back will be tormented for a longer period of time in gehenna than those who died thousands of years ago, to make up for the fact that they are tormented for a much shorter period of time in hades, all other things being equal.

[@JosiahFickinger]

The Bible teaches the soul sleeps. Meaning: No human is neither in Heaven nor Hell. They are reserved in a state of unconsciousness. However, once you die, in your perspective, you will literally reawake at the end of time, but it'll feel instant.

[@KKKaTTT123]

Revelation, the final book in the New Testament, was “squeezed into the canon in the fourth century,” said Pagels, and barely made it into the 27-book lineup. Over the centuries, it continued to draw the ire of critics, from theologian Martin Luther to author D.H. Lawrence. To this day, Eastern Orthodox Christian sects decline to use Revelation in public worship.

[@xintimidate]

And that may cause them to lose salvation once the mark of the beast is here. People dont realize but the Christian world will enforce the mark of the beast, more specifically, apostate Protestantism in the US and Roman Catholicism (the wh0re of babylon)

[@exclusive_148]

Rich man and lazurus: Why does the intermediate state contain fire linked with torment??????? What a coincidence that the intermediate state and the final state are two seperate events yet they both contain the same elements of fire and torment. The intermediate state contains consciousness so why should all of the sudden we assume the final state doesnt contain consiousness???? This points to a continuity of the intermediate state and final state. - JAMES WON ON THIS POINT

[@socalkook370]

Matthew 10:28: "And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." The first death is *only* the death of the body which renders it an unconscious corpse, and not the death of the conscious soul. Just because there could be consciousness following the first death (death of only the body) during the intermediate state, it does not mean that the second death will also include consciousness since both the body AND the soul will die following judgement. The soul will be made like a lifeless corpse in the same manner the body dies in the first death, unconscious and therefore incapable of being tormented.

[@exclusive_148]

@@socalkook370 The bible talks about physical death AND spiritual death. Physical death is linked to the body and spiritual death is linked to our soul/spirit. The body is NOT conscious but the spirit is. If the first death makes one unconscious then explain the rich man a lazarus story. I know you'll prob say its not literal but how is it not literal? Prove it wasn't literal. If you agree that there is consciousness after the first death, then your agreeing that there is consciousness after the body dies. What the heck is an "intermediate state"??? That sounds like an invented thing to try to justify how the bible shows that consciousness continues after the body dies. You basically saying the body and soul are the same thing even though the bible separates the two. If your not saying the same thing then explain the difference between the body and the soul

[@socalkook370]

​@@exclusive_148 It seems you missed my point. You are correct, the Bible does talk about physical death and spiritual death, and the first death is the death of only the body, which makes the body unconscious, but not the soul which remains alive and (possibly) conscious. It would be perfectly reasonable to believe that Jesus could be recounting a historical event, since although the body of the rich man is dead, *his soul is alive to experience Hades* . So no, just because I think there could be consciousness after the first death in which *only* the body dies but the spirit lives, it doesn't mean I must believe there will be consciousness after the second death since both body and soul will be destroyed, meaning there will be nothing left alive to experience torment. The "intermediate state" is a term used to describe Hades or Sheol, which is the place the souls of the dead will be after the first death but before final judgement. There is debate on whether or not there is consciousness in Hades, but it is irrelevant, either view is compatible with Conditionalism. Same goes for dualism vs monism (physicalism), both views are compatible, but I think traditional dualism makes more sense

[@exclusive_148]

@@socalkook370 Ok i think i understand what your saying: Its a valid point that just because one is conscious in after the 1st death (the intermediate state) that doesnt mean one is conscious in the 2nd death. - So let me ask you this because im just recently learning about this view and its very interesting to me. 1.) Whats the purpose of an intermediate state? If one deserves to be destroyed completely, whats the point of being conscious after the 1st death. 2.)Whats the purpose of having a conscious person in the intermediate state for 100s of years vs another person being conscious in the intermediate state for like a day if they die right before the resurrection of the dead??? I think the debate whether or not someone is conscious in hades is VERY RELEVANT because if we can show that there IS consciousness after the body dies then why wouldn't there be consciousness after the 2nd death? The burden of proof is on you to show that the 1st death is different than the 2nd death conscious wise.

[@exclusive_148]

@@socalkook370 *****Secondly speaking let me add this: What is the intermediate state like??? Is it like the rich man and Lazarus story describes it as Burning in agony??? Because if it is, then conditional immortality makes even LESS sense because whats the point of having individuals burn in agony for 100s of years and then other people just die right before the resurrection of the dead and just go from living to basically dying and loosing consciousness while millions of other people in history suffered in agony in the intermediate state for 100s of years. Now that makes absolutely no sense so the debate whether people are conscious in the "intermediate state" is actually alot more important and relevant than your making it seem

[@ThemCoversMB]

I don't think one can hold on to the idea that the soul is simply indestructible. That's just assuming it isn't. But, I'm sure God could destroy anything if he wanted to.

[@stevendrumm4957]

Which position does Cameron hold on this issue? Or is he undecided on the issue?

[@KKKaTTT123]

Its incredible how much damage the book of revelation has done to its church, obtaining the opposite of what Jesus hoped. No wonder the orthodox church doesnt want its church to read it without support from a priest and that it almost didnt make it in to the cannon...

[@laurakosch]

Yes… and yet it is the only book that comes with a promise of blessing to its readers