#5 Jesus on Hell Matthew 25:31-46

[Wootah]

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=NIV

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Verse 46 says they will go away to eternal punishment but the righteous to eternal life.

If 'go away to eternal punishment' means annihilation then why presume 'righteous to eternal life' means eternal life?

There are two eternal destinations, hell and heaven being expressed in verse 46.

Isn't it biased to say eternal punishment is not eternal but eternal life is eternal life?

According to those that believe in annihilation and that the Bible doesn't teach hell, why do they interpret the first half of verse 46 as non-literal and the second half as literally?

[2timothy316]

It does make you wrong when the reason I don't see anyone taking Ecc 9 out of context is not because I agree with them. I don't see anyone taking Ecc 9 out of context because I can't find any evidence of them doing that.

Nope. It merely means you are unable to see or "find any evidence."

And I certainly can't depend on you to provide any evidence.

Quit trying to explain why I agree or disagree with people. Let me speak for myself.

I mean, I'll do what I want,

People that do that around are normally on probation.

Is your reason that you find them taking Ecc 9 out of context simply because you disagree with them or because you have evidence that they are?

Um... yes.

Your disagreeing is not evidence or a good reason to believe what you say about Ecc chapter 9.

You'll say yet again that I'm adding something that's not there. Well, in the absolute sense, okay, but reading the text for all it's worth, absolutely not. Grace and peace to you.

These words like 'all it's worth'. Is all you.

You know you're adding something that is not there. There is no mention of heaven or hell or anything else in Ecc chapter nine. YOU add it. You are adding WAY more to the phrase 'under the sun' then Solomon put in the whole book of Ecclesiastes. Solomon wrote NOTHING else about life after death. Zero, zilch, nada. YOU add more than what the whole book talks about. If any thing is being taken out of context it is that Ecc chapter 9 is out of YOUR personal context. Everyone else can see it too.

[2timothy316]

You avoided my main question in post 23. God or you, which one are you claiming people are taking Ecc 9 out of context?

Well, maybe, but it was unintentional. I think I've answered it many times over. The writer of Ecclesiastes, humanly speaking, but God, ultimately, in view of what Paul tells us in 2 Timothy 3:16-17.

Grace and peace to you.

You have not answered it. You have only shown your opinion and you own dogma about dead is alive, as the reason why you disagree but you certainly have not proven anyone is taking Ecc 9 out of context. There is no mention of anyone going to heaven or hell anywhere in the whole book of Ecc. To take something out of context of life after death there would have to be some mention of life after death in the chapter. There is nothing. It says, "... the Grave where you are going." Period!

[PinSeeker]

It does make you wrong when the reason I don't see anyone taking Ecc 9 out of context is not because I agree with them. I don't see anyone taking Ecc 9 out of context because I can't find any evidence of them doing that.

Nope. It merely means you are unable to see or "find any evidence."

And I certainly can't depend on you to provide any evidence.

Sure. Yeah, don't depend on me or any other person, depend on the Lord, right? The book of Ecclesiastes (and the rest of Scripture) is all the evidence we need. Like the hymn-writer asks, "What more can He say that to you He has said, to you Who for refuge to Jesus have fled?" (How Firm a Foundation). It is what it is.

Quit trying to explain why I agree or disagree with people. Let me speak for myself.

I mean, I'll do what I want,

People that do that around are normally on probation.

Well, I'm on probation (whatever that means) because some things I have said were deemed "attacks." That aside, we're all kind of doing what we want. Free will, right?

Is your reason that you find them taking Ecc 9 out of context simply because you disagree with them or because you have evidence that they are?

Um... yes.

Your disagreeing is not evidence or a good reason to believe what you say about Ecc chapter 9.

Agreed. Other parts of Scripture give us more insight, as has been evident in my posts (should have been, anyway). God is His own arbiter, after all.

You'll say yet again that I'm adding something that's not there. Well, in the absolute sense, okay, but reading the text for all it's worth, absolutely not. Grace and peace to you.

These words like 'all it's worth'. Is all you.

Appreciate your opinion.

You know you're adding something that is not there. There is no mention of heaven or hell or anything else in Ecc chapter nine. YOU add it. You are adding WAY more to the phrase 'under the sun' then Solomon put in the whole book of Ecclesiastes. Solomon wrote NOTHING else about life after death. Zero, zilch, nada. YOU add more than what the whole book talks about. If any thing is being taken out of context it is that Ecc chapter 9 is out of YOUR personal context.

Nope. Again, appreciate your opinion. Sometimes, though, silence is deafening. Especially when "heard" in relation to the rest of Scripture.

Everyone else can see it too.

LOL! The ones that agree with you, sure. But still, it is what it is.

You avoided my main question in post 23. God or you, which one are you claiming people are taking Ecc 9 out of context?

Well, maybe, but it was unintentional. I think I've answered it many times over. The writer of Ecclesiastes, humanly speaking, but God, ultimately, in view of what Paul tells us in 2 Timothy 3:16-17.

You have not answered it.

I have answered it many times over, and now here again.

You have only shown your opinion and you own dogma about dead is alive...

Well, just on this one particular thing, right back at you.

...you certainly have not proven anyone is taking Ecc 9 out of context. There is no mention of anyone going to heaven or hell anywhere in the whole book of Ecc. To take something out of context of life after death there would have to be some mention of life after death in the chapter. There is nothing. It says, "... the Grave where you are going." Period!

2timothy316, you're making my point for me here, which is astonishing. Yes, there is no mention of anyone going to heaven or hell, and what is being talked about throughout Ecclesiastes is life under the sun or the lack of it (this life). And what is being done by some is applying it to eternity, the age to come. That's how it's being taken completely out of context. And it's not me, it's... well, others. This is exactly my point. Thank you for making it. Now if... some... were actually to stay inside it (the context, that is), that would be... stupendous.

Grace and peace to you.

[2timothy316]

You know you're adding something that is not there. There is no mention of heaven or hell or anything else in Ecc chapter nine. YOU add it. You are adding WAY more to the phrase 'under the sun' then Solomon put in the whole book of Ecclesiastes. Solomon wrote NOTHING else about life after death. Zero, zilch, nada. YOU add more than what the whole book talks about. If any thing is being taken out of context it is that Ecc chapter 9 is out of YOUR personal context.

Nope. Again, appreciate your opinion. Sometimes, though, silence is deafening. Especially when "heard" in relation to the rest of Scripture.

What scripture? I keep asking for this but all you give is your opinion on 'under the sun'.

Everyone else can see it too.

LOL! The ones that agree with you, sure. But still, it is what it is.

Indeed it is what it is. But it's not what you add to it.

You avoided my main question in post 23. God or you, which one are you claiming people are taking Ecc 9 out of context?

Well, maybe, but it was unintentional. I think I've answered it many times over. The writer of Ecclesiastes, humanly speaking, but God, ultimately, in view of what Paul tells us in 2 Timothy 3:16-17.

You have not answered it.

I have answered it many times over, and now here again.

Ecc 9:10 says that we all are going to the grave. Nothing more...yet you add more of your opinion not more scripture. 2 Tim 3:16 is not referring to you.

You have only shown your opinion and you own dogma about dead is alive...

Well, just on this one particular thing, right back at you.

Actually no, I have quoted scripture. "Whatever your hand finds to do, do with all your might, for there is no work nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom in the Grave, where you are going." Ecc 9:10. That scripture is not my opinion.

...you certainly have not proven anyone is taking Ecc 9 out of context. There is no mention of anyone going to heaven or hell anywhere in the whole book of Ecc. To take something out of context of life after death there would have to be some mention of life after death in the chapter. There is nothing. It says, "... the Grave where you are going." Period!

2timothy316, you're making my point for me here, which is astonishing. Yes, there is no mention of anyone going to heaven or hell, and what is being talked about throughout Ecclesiastes is life under the sun or the lack of it (this life).

"This life". Are those words in Ecc? Nope. Its your addition. This is the problem and where you make MY point. Below is more addition.

And what is being done by some is applying it to eternity, the age to come.

What they are applying is the condition of the dead to the dead.
You see 'eternity' and 'the age to come'. Which is nowhere in Ecc and giving life to a person that Ecc says is dead.

That's how it's being taken completely out of context.

No because there is no mention in Ecc of what you keep talking about. Only what YOU talk about. Context means taking out sentence of what is WRITTEN and not what you're interpreting. Your whole interpretation of 'under the sun' is not a Biblical interpretation, it is YOURS.

[PinSeeker]

What scripture? I keep asking for this but all you give is your opinion on 'under the sun'.

All. Of. Ecclesiastes. This is the entire context of Ecclesiastes. All twelve chapters. From the beginning of chapter 1 ("Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity. What does man gain by all the toil at which he toils under the sun?") to the end of chapter 12 ("The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man."). All of it.

"This life". Are those words in Ecc? Nope. Its your addition. This is the problem and where you make MY point. Below is more addition.

"This life" equals "life under the sun"... "life under the sun" is a euphemism for this life. It is what it is.

Context means taking out sentence of what is WRITTEN and not what you're interpreting.

I'm not even sure of the sense of this assertion. No, context is the circumstance that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea. And all of Ecclesiastes is devoted to this life, "life under the sun." And what several posters continue to do is take it completely out of this setting, applying it to the age to come ~ in order to use it and make it out to jive with ~ which, of course, it does not ~ the belief in annihilation.

Grace and peace to you.

[myth-one.com]

. . . context is the circumstance that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea. And all of Ecclesiastes is devoted to this life, "life under the sun." And what several posters continue to do is take it completely out of this setting, applying it to the age to come ~ in order to use it and make it out to jive with ~ which, of course, it does not ~ the belief in annihilation.

The "dead know not any thing" refers to death, and there are two possible human deaths -- the first and the second.

While humans lie in their graves after their first death, they know not any thing. They have no awareness of time.

The next consciousness they have will be that of being resurrected. It will seem to them to have been instantaneous. This is regardless of whether the resurrection occurred one second or thousands of years after their deaths. Why? Because the dead know nothing. They don't even know they are dead.

But there is no resurrection from the second death.

Those who will die their second physical human death will never know anything ever again.

[2timothy316]

Context means taking out sentence of what is WRITTEN and not what you're interpreting.

I'm not even sure of the sense of this assertion.

That doesn't surprise me. Those that have indoctrinated for so long can't tell where the Bible ends and their doctrine begins.

No, context is the circumstance that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea. And all of Ecclesiastes is devoted to this life, "life under the sun." And what several posters continue to do is take it completely out of this setting,

No. That is what YOU are doing. Adding stuff about heaven and hell calling it 'context'. Your 'context' is just the doctrine you through your rose colored glasses. The rest of are letting Ecc explain the condition of the dead. That's it! We don't add our own 'context'.

applying it to the age to come ~ in order to use it and make it out to jive with ~ which, of course, it does not ~ the belief in annihilation.

Because that is exactly what it is saying. The dead are not in a state of being alive an ANY way. Just because you don't believe what Ecc is saying is no reason to add some interpretation to it. Dead = dead. That's it. We are all people, we are all headed for death in the grave. Dead people don't think, feel, hate, love, and are not rewarded. Ecc does not talk about anything about life after death. That is what YOU keep adding calling it 'context', which not right. Ecc is out of your context. Yet I only see you and Wootah adding 'context' to Ecc that shouldn't be there. Then crying foul because Ecc doesn't fit your dogma. Well, too bad. Change your dogma to fit the Bible and move on like many of us have. Let go of the idea of a eternal soul because Ecc doesn't support it. We are not 'using it' we are believing it. My doctrine doesn't command the Bible what to say, like yours does, the Bible commands what my doctrine is to be. If the Bible says there is, "no work nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom in the Grave." Then I believe it. I don't add my own 'context' to it so that it fits me.

[PinSeeker]

While humans lie in their graves after their first death, they know not any thing. They have no awareness of time.

Well, they experience not any thing of this life (including the passage of time in it). But they do know a few things, as Jesus's parable in Luke 16 clearly shows. Most all of the time, knowing something or someone means not mere cognitive ability but experiencing that thing and/or even loving that thing. Like, for example:

1. In Genesis 2, regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. They knew what good and evil was, because God told them what to do and what not to do. And at that point they had done no evil ~ they had not sinned ~ and would not have become so had they not eaten from that tree in Genesis 3. But when they did, they became sinful and knowledgeable of ~ prone to; inclined toward ~ evil/sin. This became their condition, which they bequeathed to all of us. This is why we are sinners.

2. Adam knew Eve in Genesis 4, and they had a son. Well of course he knew who she was, but it's saying they... well, did something together... ... and had a son.

3. Even in Ecclesiastes itself, in chapter 1, we read, "...I applied my heart to know wisdom and to know madness and folly. I perceived that this also is but a striving after wind." Knowing is closely associated with an action there in that one verse (striving after wind, verse 17). And in the next verse (18), we find out why this is a striving after the wind, because "...in much wisdom is much vexation, and he who increases knowledge increases sorrow." He strives after the wind more and more, and thus sorrow increases.

The next consciousness they have will be that of being resurrected. It will seem to them to have been instantaneous.

Nope.

But there is no resurrection from the second death.

Agreed, here, certainly. They are resurrected to it.

Those who will die their second physical human death will never know anything ever again.

They will not experience life ~ true life ~ in the new heaven and new earth with the triune, living God. But that's certainly not to say they experience nothing, as the opposite is clearly the case. For anyone, I would hope they never have to find out.

Grace and peace to you.

[myth-one.com]

Those who will die their second physical human death will never know anything ever again.

For anyone, I would hope they never have to find out.

Rest assured that they will never have to find out -- as those undergoing the second death know absolutely nothing.

Why should they? What purpose does it serve?

They choose to opt out of life. And God will honor their decision!

Stop worrying!

[PinSeeker]

Context means taking out sentence of what is WRITTEN and not what you're interpreting.

I'm not even sure of the sense of this assertion.

That doesn't surprise me. Those that have indoctrinated for so long can't tell where the Bible ends and their doctrine begins.

No, what you said here is nonsensical. It's not grammatical, really. Not to mention it doesn't speak to what context really is.

No, context is the circumstance that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea. And all of Ecclesiastes is devoted to this life, "life under the sun." And what several posters continue to do is take it completely out of this setting,

No.

Yes. that's what context is, the very definition of it.

We don't add our own 'context'.

Right, but you change the context of Ecclesiastes from what it is (among other parts of Scripture). That's the point.

...applying it to the age to come ~ in order to use it and make it out to jive with ~ which, of course, it does not ~ the belief in annihilation.

Because that is exactly what it is saying. The dead are not in a state of being alive an ANY way.

From this life, life under the sun. Nothing is being said about the age to come, which we know there is. So what you say the writer of Ecclesiastes is saying there is not what he is saying at all.

Just like some other posters here, to know (or in this case, to know nothing) means not mere cognitive ability regarding something or lack thereof, but rather to be aware of, experience, and understand that something. Ecclesiastes 17-18 make this very clear from the very beginning:

• "And I applied my heart to know wisdom and to know madness and folly. I perceived that this also is but a striving after wind. For in much wisdom is much vexation, and he who increases knowledge increases sorrow."

Does this passage indicate that before this person "applied his/her heart," that he or she knew nothing about anything? Of course not. He or she, through conscientious, sincere effort, came to be aware of, experience, and understand, the difference between true wisdom and madness/folly.

And the context of Ecclesiastes is life under the sun, this life, and has nothing to do with any state or lack thereof in the age to come. When they have passed, they will experience nothing of life under the sun (this life) anymore. But that's not to say they experience nothing ~ as if ceasing to exist in the age to come, as annihilation would suggest. As I have said, the silence regarding the age to come in Ecclesiastes ~ just like Jesus's to the thief crucified on His left who doesn't believe ~ is deafening.

Grace and peace to you.