I’ve already told you, same definition in Jn. 3:16, no resurrection, only second death. Eternal life requires a spiritual birth, without it, it’s eternal death in the Lake of Fire (Rev. 20:14-15).
Jeremiah was prophesying about Israel’s redemption through Yeshua and a Melkezedic priesthood, same as “made holy” in Daniel 9:24. Meanwhile Lake of Fire is the punishment for Satan, there’s verses suggest that it IS eternal, such as Rev. 14:11, Mk. 9:48, whereas no verse is found to suggest otherwise.
That's not correct. Jeremiah said it is going to be made holy to the Lord.
But there is resurrection of the wicked. Jesus said the day is coming when "all" who are on the grave will hear His voice ans live.
No, not all. Wicked receive the verdict of the white throne judgement and go straight into the lake of fire. Their “resurrection” is only for the second death. Only “whosoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” And don’t ask me what it is, go read Rev. 20 and John 3 yourself. You’re straightforward denying the holy scripture and you have the audacity to lecture on me?
Oh great, so it’s the translator’s fault, huh? Who gave us the peasants access to the word of god in the first place? You’re relying on a heresy that’s not found in either the original or any translation. Any translator is more correct than you. I’ll ask you again, what about all those verses I posted before that say the end IS eternal?
This is the heresy of universalism. Wicked are resurrected only for the SECOND death, there’s no life with Christ in between, only the white throne judgement. Ever heard of YOLO? You only live once, which most heathens really believe? They mean it.
They're resurrected then, aren't they? I've not denied any Scripture. I've simply pointed out that there is error in the English translation of aion. Your entire argument is based on that one word. Let me ask you this, how can the wicked perish and at the same time suffer eternal torment? I've not lectured you, my friend, I've simply asked you to make a case for your doctrine. There seems to be a conflict between Psalm 37 which states repeatedly that the wicked will, perish, vanish away, be no more, etc. and the doctrine that many espouse today that says the wicked will be tormented forever. These two are mutually exclusive. They cannot both be true. The law of Noncontradiction states that two opposing things cannot be true at the same time. Thus, the wicked cannot both perish and suffer eternally. So, either David, a prophet of God, was wrong in Psalm 37 or those espousing this doctrine of eternal torment are wrong.
And I've simply pointed out that there's no second life for them, only second DEATH, which is kind of worse than no resurrection at all, don't you think? They "perish" or "vanish" from the perspective of the righteous, all the saints with Christ shall see them no more, same sense as God's promise to Moses and the Israelites in Ex. 14:13, "The Egyptians you see today will never be seen again." That doesn't mean they cease to exist, it only indicates they are separated from God and His people forever with absolutely no chance to repent FOREVER, and they're united with Satan who's also cast into the Lake of Fire. If that's not torment, I don't know what is. Hades isn't forever, but the Lake of Fire is. There's no Scripture verse that suggests the Lake of Fire isn't forever. It's never about one word, it's about the whole narrative. You see the tree, I see the forest. I hold on to what the Scripture really says, you're the one who preaches unbiblical annihilationism, which is actually a man made doctrine for itching ears.
That's exactly what I had in mind, "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit", John 3:6, just worded differently. That's only for believer, not heathens.
In this case it is the translator's fault for a sloppy handling of the word aion. The also did the same with the word hell. How does one translate three distinctly separate places with the same name of hell? Gehenna is an actual location outside of Jerusalem. Notice in the Old Testament it's called by its name, The Valley of Hinnom, The valley of the Son of Hinnom, or Tophet. Why then, when we get to the New Testament where Jesus references this same location, calling it Gehenna, do the translators suddenly switch from transliterating it, calling it by its name, to translating it to a concept that has pagan overtones and absolutely nothing to do with The Valley of the Son of Hinnom? By doing this, they not only give cover to a pagan doctrine, but they also keep the reader from seeing the connection Jesus is making to the Valley of Hinnom and its history.
Who appointed you to be a judge over the translations? Yes, Gehenna is a real place where trash and corpses are being burned, in the NT it was used SYMBOLICALLY to describe the Lake of Fire. It was a teaching method to help visualize the graphic image of the Lake of Fire, same as all the kingdom parables. You can't actually go there to investigate and come back with a report. Yeshua was using what the audience did understand to teach what they didn't understand, what they were familiar with to teach what they weren't familiar with. This is one pitfall of the hermaneutics, you're obsessed with this one word, you just can't see the forest for the trees. You keep struggling with one piece of the puzzle while you miss the whole picture.
Where do you see any of this in the Scriptures? No, seeing them no more doesn't necessitate ceasing to exist. However, watching them be covered up by the water and seeing the dead bodies afterward does. Where in the context of Psalm 37 does you see perish that doesn't mean cease to exist? The contrast is what happens to the righteous and what happens to the wicked. They perish is equated with, they will be no more. They will be no more definitely means to cease to exist.
What does that mean?
There's one problem with that. Jesus didn't make a comparison. He didn't say, you can't comprehend the lake of fire so I'll use Gehenna as an example. No one until John, late in his life, knew anything about a lake of Fire. Both Paul and Jude write of the faith being complete before John ever had his vision of Revelation. How can Jesus be making a comparison when the thing supposedly being explained is never mentioned? Other than Revelation we don't find the lake of fire anywhere in Scripture.
If they cease to exist, then who are those whose name are not found in the book of life and receiving the white throne judgement? How could they be judged - according to their works? You're still denying the message of Rev. 20 and preaching the heresy of annihilationism, which Yeshua positively rebuked in Matthew 25:46:”And these will go away into EVERLASTING PUNISHMENT, but the righteous into eternal life.” Both Jeremiah and Isaiah were talking about the final resurrection - of the RIGHTEOUS, not the wicked. You yourself quoted Rev. 21:8, so go figure. Scripture is CONSISTENT, no portion contradicts another portion. Anyone who attempts to use one portion against another portion is undermining the authority of the Scripture.
No, you haven't covered any bit of the forest. All you did is twisting the definition of key words and denying what the Scripture teaches. Aions is the same as "eons" in English, which means "an immeasurably or indefinitely long period of time". If it was measurable or definite, then that's purgatory from false Catholic teaching, not Lake of Fire from the word of God. The book of Revelation, as the last book of the bible, is called REVELATION for a reason, all those mysteries and prophecies that were wrapped in symbolism are now REVEALED before Apostle John's own eyes. Harlot, lamb, horsemen, etc. are not new, all of them were written in OT prophecies, but only in Revelation are their true meaning revealed. Therefore it IS the otherway around, you got it completely backwards.
First of all, what - or who - perishes? Second, perishes from what - or who? You know, annihilationism is not even scientifically correct, it's against the first law of thermodynamics, neither matter nor energy can just perish by ceasing to exist, they can only be converted from one form to another, naturally from available from to unavailable form, which is the second law of thermodynamics. Bible states correctly on this, as in "to dust you shall return", while the spirit breathed from God returns to God. What doesn't return to God is all those UNCLEAN spirits, they come from Satan and return to Satan, who will be bound for a thousand years and end up in the Lake of Fire afterwards.
