I Found the Source of Irrational Fear of God

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

crakjak please explain:

Luke 16:24 "Then he cried and said, 'Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.'
Luk 16:25 "But Abraham said, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted and you are tormented.

The fact there is a hell PROVES God loves us. Its the evidence that He gives us freewill.

DB you have raised two points that are major discussions in themselves. I will address them both briefly.

The verses in Luke that you present are one of many parables that Jesus spoke. In Matthew 13.34-35, says that He only spoke to them in parables. This is readily clear by reviewing the story: Did Lazarus literally crawl under the rich man's table and eat his crumbs? No. When Lazarus died was he literally transported to Abraham's bosom? No, it is figurative of something else. Then Lazarus is able to carry on a conversation with the rich man (supposedly from heaven to hell) and they seem to be able to see one another, even though Abraham and Lazarus were "afar off."
I will not belabor the fact that the details confirm that this story is a parable to convey something different than the obvious.

The true meaning of the parable conveys the condition of the Gentiles in relation to the Jews. Lazarus was a very common name transliteration of the Hebrew "Eleazar" (which means "God has helped") used for eleven different persons in the OT. The rich man represents the Jews, the promise of Abraham was given to Judah, and Judah and the rich man both had "five brothers" and these brothers (the Jews) had "Moses and the prophets". And they would not believe even if one were raised from the dead. Jesus was raised for the dead and they did not believe. Therefore, they were cast out and the Gentiles were receiving the "promises of Abraham". There are many more comparisons in this story but this is getting too length, with your knowledge of scripture you will be able to see the point.

Your last statement I have absolutely no comprehension of, why must God torture unbelievers to prove His love? Much better to annihilate, is God revengeful returning retribution exceeding the crime by billions? Where in scripture do we find this all powerful "freewill" that exceeds the power of a all powerful, all loving Heavenly Father? You have freewill only within the context of how and where God made and placed you, you will receive a "just recompense of reward" for your works. The traditional view of Hell is NOT a "just reward", it has been created in the evil mind of fallen man and imposed on us by the apostate church and pagan traditions.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by crakjak

"Augustine raised the argument (as you have,Praxeas) that since aionios in Mt. 25.46 referred to both life and punishment, it had to carry the same duration in both cases. However, he failed to consider that the duration of aionios is determined by the subject it refers.

It sounds like he DID consider the subject. Life and Punishment. You just said that. Aionios defined means a continuing period, not a temporary one. How can you get around the definition of the word?

For example, when aionios to the duration of Jonah's entrapment in the fish, it was limited to three days.

What verse is that?

To a slave, aionios referred to his life span. To the Aaronic priesthood, it referred to the generation preceding the Melchizedek priesthood.

They did not speak greek back then. Are you referring to the LXX and if so please give me the verses here so I can look them up

To Soloman's temple, it referred to 400 years.

Verse please?

To God (and the life He gives), it encompasses and transcends time altogether. Thus, the word cannot have a set value. It is a relative term and it duration depends upon that with which it is associated. It is similar to what "tall" is to height. The size of a tall building can be 300 feet, a tall man six feet, and a tall dog three feet. Black Beauty was a great horse, Abe Lincoln a great man, and Yahweh the GREAT God." () are mine.

WE are talking about a specific word here, not philosophical musings. The word DOES have a set definition.,

Consider the following translations of aion.:

Young's Literal Translation: "punishment age-during."
Rotherham Translation: "age-abiding correction."
Weymouth Translation: "punishment of the ages"
Concordant Literal Translation: "chastening eonian."

We are not talking about Aion

aiōnios
ahee-o'-nee-os
From G165; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well): - eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).

aiōnios
Thayer Definition:
1) without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be
2) without beginning
3) without end, never to cease, everlasting

Consider the context and the contrast as Augustine did. Why not use a different word for punishment that contrasts with the word used for Life if he is making the point that it is temporary? Given the context then it would be temporary life too if you are right

A.T. Robertson
Eternal punishment (kolasin aiōnion). The word kolasin comes from kolazō, to mutilate or prune. Hence those who cling to the larger hope use this phrase to mean age-long pruning that ultimately leads to salvation of the goats, as disciplinary rather than penal. There is such a distinction as Aristotle pointed out between mōria (vengeance) and kolasis. But the same adjective aiōnios is used with kolasin and zōēn. If by etymology we limit the scope of kolasin, we may likewise have only age-long zōēn. There is not the slightest indication in the words of Jesus here that the punishment is not coeval with the life. We can leave all this to the King himself who is the Judge. The difficulty to one’s mind about conditional chastisement is to think how a life of sin in hell can be changed into a life of love and obedience. The word aiōnios (from aiōn, age, aevum, aei) means either without beginning or without end or both. It comes as near to the idea of eternal as the Greek can put it in one word. It is a difficult idea to put into language. Sometimes we have “ages of ages” (aiōnes tōn aiōnōn).

Mat 18:8 -
In Mat_18:8 and Mat_18:9 we have one of the dualities or doublets in Matthew (Mat_5:29-30). Jesus repeated his pungent sayings many times. Instead of eis geennan (Mat_5:29) we have eis to pur to aiōnion and at the end of Mat_18:9 tou puros is added to tēn geennan. This is the first use in Matthew of aiōnios. We have it again in Mat_19:16, Mat_19:29 with zoē, in Mat_25:41 with pur, in Mat_25:46 with kolasin and zoēn. The word means ageless, without beginning or end as of God (Rom_16:26), without beginning as in Rom_16:25, without end as here and often. The effort to make it mean “aeonian” fire will make it mean “aeonian” life also. If the punishment is limited, ipso facto the life is shortened. In Mat_18:9 also monophthalmon occurs. It is an Ionic compound in Herodotus that is condemned by the Atticists, but it is revived in the vernacular Koiné. Literally one-eyed. Here only and Mar_9:47 in the New Testament.

BTW you keep referring to emotional response, the scripture says that the Word is "spirit" and "life". "The letter kills, the Spirit makes alive", so I have no problem adding the emotion of my born again spirit

.
I don't see how those verses justify attaching your own feelings to the scripture and using your feelings as a measuring rod to determine what the bible should be saying.

It's a deceptive ploy used by debaters. It's a logical fallacy. This is from a list of logical fallacies

4. Prejudicial Language
DEFINITION: Loaded or emotive terms are used to attach value or moral goodness to believing the proposition.
EXAMPLE (italics indicate the prejudicial language): "Reasonable Picard fans agree that 'Generations' is a great movie, and only the Kirk fanatics would disagree."


PROOF: Identify the prejudicial terms used. Such as in the example, show that disagreeing with the conclusion does not make a person "fanatical" or "unreasonable".



And this




6. Appeal to Emotion

DEFINITION: An Appeal to Emotion is a fallacy with the following structure:
1. Favorable emotions are associated with X.
2. Therefore, X is true.


This fallacy is committed when someone manipulates peoples' emotions in order to get them to accept a claim as being true. More formally, this sort of "reasoning" involves the substitution of various means of producing strong emotions in place of evidence for a claim. If the favorable emotions associated with X influence the person to accept X as true because they "feel good about X," then he has fallen prey to the fallacy.


This sort of "reasoning" is very common in politics and it serves as the basis for a large portion of modern advertising. Most political speeches are aimed at generating feelings in people so that these feelings will get them to vote or act a certain way. in the case of advertising, the commercials are aimed at evoking emotions that will influence people to buy certain products. In most cases, such speeches and commercials are notoriously free of real evidence.


This sort of "reasoning" is quite evidently fallacious. It is fallacious because using various tactics to incite emotions in people does not serve as evidence for a claim. For example, if a person were able to inspire in a person an incredible hatred of the claim that 1+1 = 2 and then inspired the person to love the claim that 1+1 = 3, it would hardly follow that the claim that 1+1 = 3 would be adequately supported.



See Im interested in the truth of what God's word says, not in your feelings and negative emotional attachments you can use to try to FORCE others to agree with your viewpoint...that's not truth. Many great speakers have deceived people into believing something based on emotional appeal and not rather on facts and the truth. I figured you were someone that wanted to truely examine what the bible said based on the factual merits of what the bible is saying, not based on how our subjective feelings can cause us to see the scriptures different than what they were intended to mean grammatically and logically

[crakjak]

I believe these verses listed below will cover the verses you ask for.

Aionios means enduring through or pertaining to a period of time. Both the noun and the adjective are applied to limited periods. Thus the phrase eis ton aiona, habitually rendered forever, is often used of duration which is limited in the very nature of the case. See, for a few out of many instances, LXX, Exod 21:6;(the slave) 29:9 (Aaronic priesthood); 32:13 (the land promised forever); Josh. 14:9; Lev. 25:46; Deut. 15:17 (servant); 1 Chron. 28:4;. See also Matt. 21:19; John 13:8 1 Cor. 8:13. The same is true of aionios. Out of 150 instances in LXX, four-fifths imply limited duration. For a few instances see Gen. 48:4; Num. 10:8; 15:15; Prov. 22:28; Jonah 2:6 (in he fish); Hab. 3:6; Isa. 61:17.

These verses reflect a limited length of time, as a usage of aionios. Even when it is speaking of the life of God we are not forced to render it eternal, however God's life is without question endless. Punishment is not required to be endless at all.


I am not a professional debater, so forgive me if I use a professional ploy, it is purely accidental.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by crakjak

I believe these verses listed below will cover the verses you ask for.

Aionios means enduring through or pertaining to a period of time. Both the noun and the adjective are applied to limited periods. Thus the phrase eis ton aiona, habitually rendered forever, is often used of duration which is limited in the very nature of the case. See, for a few out of many instances, LXX, Exod 21:6;(the slave) 29:9 (Aaronic priesthood); 32:13 (the land promised forever); Josh. 14:9; Lev. 25:46; Deut. 15:17 (servant); 1 Chron. 28:4;. See also Matt. 21:19; John 13:8 1 Cor. 8:13. The same is true of aionios. Out of 150 instances in LXX, four-fifths imply limited duration. For a few instances see Gen. 48:4; Num. 10:8; 15:15; Prov. 22:28; Jonah 2:6 (in he fish); Hab. 3:6; Isa. 61:17.

These verses reflect a limited length of time, as a usage of aionios. Even when it is speaking of the life of God we are not forced to render it eternal, however God's life is without question endless. Punishment is not required to be endless at all.


I am not a professional debater, so forgive me if I use a professional ploy, it is purely accidental.

I will try to go through the LXX, but I want to point out you referenced Mat 21:19 as an example of aionios but in actuality it seems the word is really aion. These are not the same words and the dictionaries give different definitions to them

Strongs
aiōn
ahee-ohn'
From the same as G104; properly an age; by extension perpetuity (also past); by implication the world; specifically (Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future): - age, course, eternal, (for) ever (-more), [n-]ever, (beginning of the, while the) world (began, without end). Compare G5550.


Compare that with

aiōnios
ahee-o'-nee-os
From G165; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well): - eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).

Aion is a noun
Aionios is an adjective

And I am looking at ex 21:6 in the LXX and the word is Aiona not Aionios.

Perhaps you can check the rest out later on.