Is Hell a place where God punishes you or you punish yourself?

calm said:

I'm sorry, but I have to interfere for a moment.
The video is nonsense. The Bible clearly teaches the hell.

Luke 16:19-31 clearly describes the hell.

Revelation 14:9-11
“If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand,
10 he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
11 And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.”

Revelation 20:10
And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Mark 9:45-46
And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 46 Where their worm(soul) dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

Matthew 8:12
But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Click to expand...

So may I ask, do you take every passage you read in the Bible, as literal? If so, why may I ask? If not, why do you take these literally - on what scriptural basis?

rrobs said:

God would like everybody to be saved (1 Tim 2:4) so if anybody ends up not saved, it's not God's idea. We have this little thing called free will. God wants us to love him by our free will. He's not interested in robotic worshipers.

I think a careful read of the scriptures would show that the unjust will get thrown into a lake of fire. Wouldn't you think that getting thrown into a lake of fire would be instant death? Of course it would be, and that is exactly what the scriptures say. It's called the "second death" in Revelation (Rev 2:11, 20:6, 20:14, 21:8).

Contrary to popular belief, the dead are actually dead. They have no thoughts, feeling, awareness, or anything else that usually accompanies life. You have to look in the Old Testament to find all of that. It's there.

Click to expand...

The "second death" does not mean that one has no consciousness anymore, the "second death" stands symbolically for eternal hell.
The human body can die but not the soul. The soul is immortal and goes after the physical death into the realm of the dead.

Jesus himself said that after his crucifixion he will be three days and three nights inside the earth (Matthew 12:40). His dead body was in the tomb but his soul was inside the earth (realm of the dead). To be more precise, Jesus was in paradise after his death. For shortly before Jesus died, he spoke to the criminal who was crucified with him: "And he said to him, Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise."(Luke 23:43)

Paradise and hell are clearly mentioned in Luke 16:19-31, where, for example, Abraham, which was already dead (physically), is also mentioned.

The souls of Moses and Elijah appeared to Jesus and spoke with him, and we also know that both have been dead for a long time. Mark 9:4
Did Jesus talk to people who were not there at all? I don't think so.

And the souls of the dead who are in the interior of the earth (the realm of the dead) are talking to God.
Revelation 6:9-10
When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne. 10 They cried out with a loud voice, "O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?"

Can dead souls who have no consciousness speak? I don't think so

nPeace said:

...
The Greek word at Matthew 10:28 is γέεννα, ης, ἡ - Gehenna.
This is different to ᾍδης, ου, ὁ - Hades.

Click to expand...

Thanks, I know Matt. 10:28 has word Gehenna, which is translated hell. I think Gehenna should be called hell and Hades could be just Hades, or grave. But certainly, they are different matters and it would be good if people would know the difference. However, I think the name is not as important as the description that there is a place where soul and body are destroyed, and actually also Hades will be thrown to there.

Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. If anyone was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire.
Revelation 20:12-15

Jos said:

All of sudden it's toned down from version that takes responsibility away from God and places it in our hands

Click to expand...

I don't understand how it's been toned down?

You have always been responsible for yourself.

God doesn't go around all willy nilly randomly selecting people to go to Heaven/Hell.

This judgment has always been based on how you lived your life. Of which you yourself are solely responsible for the decisions you make.

Nothing has change at all. You had the wrong idea of how judgment works to begin with.

tigrers2019 said:

If God can reward eternally, God can punish eternally.

Taking all Biblical and all other religions plus Theo Philosophy into account, we find that the universe was a present to God. Though God gave the power to the servants to create matter and time with mankind being the centerpiece, these servants chose to input hideous evolution into an otherwise beautiful gift. Mankind may have been able to deal with the result of manipulated evolution much like an animal is trained to behave by addressing these animal instincts. However, these supernatural former servants are using all their power working behind the scenes to manipulate our minds in turning away from what we know what is right.
God was set to destroy this 'gift' along with man until Someone intervened on mankind's behalf.
The result was that mankind was given the chance to become what God requires in order for us to be with Him. That being a changed state from what we become as we reach full awareness. This is the changed spiritual state. It is a radical change to the positive from what we wete known to be like formerly.

Though we may be trapped in some of our bad habits and language, our new spiritual state never changes.

To pass on changing our spiritual state is to pass on heaven.

Click to expand...

You have allowed religious stories to corrupt your thinking. These holy books were written by mankind so they reflect mankind, not God. Mankind values so many petty things such as ruling, controlling, manipulating, coercing, intimidating, condemning, judging, punishing, hating and such. Do you value these things as well? Are they all you see?

If a God places these things first, this God is not only at a lower level, this God is a Monster, this God lacks Great Intelligence. In time, you will learn, these petty choices will never bring the best results.

Let's widen our view a bit to Discover a Better way. Let's suppose God is Unconditional Love rather than the Monster. Unconditional Love always does what is Best for the other. Doesn't Unconditional Love supply better results than the dictator attitude of ruling, controlling,and condemning those who do not agree with you? Look at History. How did all those dictators turn out?

So if God is Unconditional Love, what is best for others? Does God fry the kids or does God teach and lead them to Greatness and the perfection God's creations will attain given enough lessons? God isn't frying His children. God is going to bring them all home. Sure it will take many many lifetimes of learning, however there has never been a time limit on learning.

You say the Universe is for God. You do not have a clue what God is all about. The universe was created for only one reason. It's time based causal nature is Perfect for Learning. The universe is not for God. It is for God's children.

You greatly underestimate God and God's Intelligence. God's actions are all around us and yet you are Blind to anything except the beliefs of mankind.

Evolution, fractals, quantum entanglement and all the many clues that paint the picture. Do you ignore things so that you can support Beliefs and Stories?

Do you want to hear Real Creation? God created the universe from one point to unfold into what we have today. It is just like a seed grows into a giant tree. The real Genius behind it all is that God created the universe to unfold in such a way that His children will be able to figure it all out in time.

Let's look at an action of God. God does not just give us knowledge. Example: Matter contains an enormous amount of energy, yet mankind is using dirty fossil fuels. God could tell us the best way but doesn't.

God places knowledge all around us. Wisdom is acquired with the struggle to attain knowledge. This method exists on everything, yet religion claims God gave them the answers. Can you really be so blind to what stares you in the face or do you value those petty things to the point of being blind to all else?

In this time-based causal universe, God's actions can be seen. A journey to Discover the Real Truth takes so much more than simply memorizing books written by mankind. When one opens a door it leads to more doors that one can open. There is so much to Learn that even for a hungry student, it will take many lifetimes before one can learn their way to a Higher Level when the physical body and the Heaven you desire so badly can even be possible.

That is what I am seeing. The first thing God pointed out to me was that mankind carries such a narrow view. I cry that. My view widens by the day and yet there is so much more to see.

In my religion hell suffers by it's own fires, and demonic spirits are kept there just by being passive to them. But, if non-violence is a nihilist anti-christ then there would also be a level of non-suffering in hell kept by the HATE devil. By no means does Jesus permit his angel's to torment others.

calm said:

The "second death" does not mean that one has no consciousness anymore, the "second death" stands symbolically for eternal hell.
The human body can die but not the soul. The soul is immortal and goes after the physical death into the realm of the dead.

Click to expand...

In Genesis God told Adam and Eve they would die if they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The devil said they would not die. Sadly, far too many sincere Christians are making the same mistake as Adam and Eve, i.e. they believe Satan over God.

Jesus himself said that after his crucifixion he will be three days and three nights inside the earth (Matthew 12:40). His dead body was in the tomb but his soul was inside the earth (realm of the dead). To be more precise, Jesus was in paradise after his death. For shortly before Jesus died, he spoke to the criminal who was crucified with him: "And he said to him, Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise."(Luke 23:43)

Click to expand...

The original Greek/Hebrew texts had no punctuation, including commas. The commas were added by man and as such possess no authority in matters of faith and practice. If one guy added the comma, then I ought to be able to move it if I want.


Notice I moved the comma to after the word "today" instead of after "you." In other words Jesus told that guy that day, that one day in the future, he would be with him. That future day is spoken of in the last couple of chapters in Revelation. There will be two resurrections. Why would we need a resurrection if everybody was not "really" dead?

Moving the comma also eliminates the contradiction that would be created between this verse and the clear verses in the OT I mentioned that there is no consciousness in death. It also agrees with God's truth in Genesis vs the devil's lie.
Clearly, if we want a comma, at least put it somewhere that doesn't cause problems with other scripture. The scriptures are perfect. They can not contradict themselves.

Paradise and hell are clearly mentioned in Luke 16:19-31, where, for example, Abraham, which was already dead (physically), is also mentioned.

Click to expand...

A parable. which is a recognized figure of speech. A figure of speech is used to emphasize something. It is not meant to be taken literal. Read the context and you will see that vs 19-31 talk about giving to the poor. Any serious student of scripture should be familiar with figures of speech. Lot's of stuff on the internet on the subject.

Once again, if Luke does say the dead are alive, we contradict what God told Adam and Eve and the other verses that talk about the finality of death (until Jesus comes and resurrects them).

The souls of Moses and Elijah appeared to Jesus and spoke with him, and we also know that both have been dead for a long time. Mark 9:4
Did Jesus talk to people who were not there at all? I don't think so.

And the souls of the dead who are in the interior of the earth (the realm of the dead) are talking to God.

Click to expand...

Matthew also talks about the transfiguration in Mark 9:4, but it added some information that Mark did not mention.

Matt 17:9,


They didn't actually see Moses and Elijah. They saw a vision.

Again, since this was a vision it does not contradict God's truth that when people die, they are quite dead and will remain so until the resurrections of Revelation

Revelation 6:9-10
When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne. 10 They cried out with a loud voice, "O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?"

Can dead souls who have no consciousness speak? I don't think so

Click to expand...

OK. How do we make this verse fit with the clear teaching of Genesis, that people will die as opposed to the devil's lie that they really don't die? Gotta make it fit somehow!

1213 said:

Thanks, I know Matt. 10:28 has word Gehenna, which is translated hell. I think Gehenna should be called hell and Hades could be just Hades, or grave. But certainly, they are different matters and it would be good if people would know the difference. However, I think the name is not as important as the description that there is a place where soul and body are destroyed, and actually also Hades will be thrown to there.

Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. If anyone was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire.
Revelation 20:12-15

Click to expand...

I think we agree, except on Gehenna being called hell.
When Jesus used the word Gehenna, he did so because the people were familiar with it. So using the literal place in a symbolic way would have been fitting.

Hell, on the other hand is of pagan origin, and not something the Jews would have related to.
Hell
The meaning given today to the word “hell” is that portrayed in Dante’s Divine Comedy and Milton’s Paradise Lost, which meaning is completely foreign to the original definition of the word. The idea of a “hell” of fiery torment, however, dates back long before Dante or Milton. The Grolier Universal Encyclopedia (1971, Vol. 9, p. 205) under “Hell” says: “Hindus and Buddhists regard hell as a place of spiritual cleansing and final restoration. Islamic tradition considers it as a place of everlasting punishment.” The idea of suffering after death is found among the pagan religious teachings of ancient peoples in Babylon and Egypt. Babylonian and Assyrian beliefs depicted the “nether world . . . as a place full of horrors, . . . presided over by gods and demons of great strength and fierceness.” Although ancient Egyptian religious texts do not teach that the burning of any individual victim would go on forever, they do portray the “Other World” as featuring “pits of fire” for “the damned.” - The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, by Morris Jastrow, Jr., 1898, p. 581; The Book of the Dead, with introduction by E. Wallis Budge, 1960, pp. 135, 144, 149, 151, 153, 161, 200.

I'll respond to everyone soon.

Until One understands Reincarnation is Biblical, One will never understand Hell.

Hell is a parable for the Womb and Reincarnation...



The Lake of Fire is simply the portal back to Earth to be born again of corruptible flesh.

Jos said:

Which is it? All of sudden nowadays I've heard a toned down version of hell from theists where a just God doesn't deservedly send you there to punish you for your sins but you send yourself there by rejecting God's love apparently, and He isn't punishing you but you're punishing yourself. All of sudden it's toned down from version that takes responsibility away from God and places it in our hands, I guess as another way to get God off the hook for anything. So which is it: does God punish us or do we punish ourselves?

Click to expand...

Hell is not a place at all. It is a temporary condition experienced by the willfully sinful and unrepentant upon physical death.

This condition will be lifted once the person is resurrected after the Final Battle (Gog and Magog).

rrobs said:

In Genesis God told Adam and Eve they would die if they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The devil said they would not die. Sadly, far too many sincere Christians are making the same mistake as Adam and Eve, i.e. they believe Satan over God.

Click to expand...

Did I tell you we weren't gonna die? Of course people die, but only the body dies, not the soul or the spirit. The soul goes after death into the realm of the dead (Isaiah 38:11) and the spirit goes back to God.(Ecclesiastes 12:7)

rrobs said:

The original Greek/Hebrew texts had no punctuation, including commas. The commas were added by man and as such possess no authority in matters of faith and practice. If one guy and add a comma, then I ought to be able to move it if I want.

"And he said to him, Truly, I say to you today, you will be with me in paradise."(Luke 23:43)
Notice I moved the comma to after the word "today" instead of after "you." In other words Jesus told that guy that day, that one day in the future, he would be with him. That future day is spoken of in the last couple of chapters in Revelation. There will be two resurrections. Why would we need a resurrection if everybody was not "really" dead?

Moving the comma also eliminates the contradiction that would be created between this verse and the clear verses in the OT I mentioned that there is no consciousness in death. It also agrees with God's truth in Genesis vs the devil's lie.
Clearly, if we want a comma, at least put it somewhere that doesn't cause problems with other scripture. The scriptures are perfect. They can not contradict themselves.

Click to expand...

No, that's wrong.
In light of this, Luke 23:42-43 is important because it is where the thief is being crucified with Christ and Jesus says to him, "today you shall be with me in paradise." The implication of Christ's words is that the thief, upon his death, would be with Jesus in Paradise. This supports the idea that very soon both of them would be together. And, it stands in contradiction to Edward Fudge's false view that the human soul is deprived of life upon death. Nevertheless, one conditionalist response is to focus on a single ','. That's right, a comma.

1. ", today" 'Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise.'"
   1. ESV, ISV, KJV, LEB, NASB, NCV, NET, NIV, NRSV, RSV, YLT, etc.
2. "today, " 'Truly I say to you today, you shall be with Me in Paradise.'"
   1. NWT (Jehovah's Witness Bible)

In line 1 Jesus is saying that the thief and he would be together that very day in Paradise. In line 2, the interpretation is that Jesus was saying those words that very day. In other words, it as though Jesus was saying "I'm telling you this right now, today, right now I'm telling you that you will be with me in Paradise..." Now, the latter approach is the same as the Jehovah's Witnesses, a non-Christian cult. But, this in no way means that conditionalists are not Christians just because some of them happen use the same argument as the JW's who also are annihilationists. The point is that the translations show the English to represent line 1, not line 2 and this effects interpretation.

I've provided a small table below listing different Greek texts. You don't have to understand Greek to make sense of this. λέγω (lego) is Greek for "I say" and σήμερον (sameron) is Greek for "today." I placed the commas and red that are found in the Greek text as I copied them. You'll notice that the second Greek text does not have a comma in it.

Greek Texts Greek with and without punctuation
These are the words to focus on. Note the , is in red
λέγω (I say), σήμερον (today)
NA26INT καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· ἀμήν σοι λέγω, σήμερον μετ̓ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ
LGNTI καὶ εἶπεν ⸀αὐτῷ· Ἀμήν ⸂σοι λέγω⸃ σήμερον μετʼ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ.
NA27 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· ἀμήν σοι λέγω, σήμερον μετʼ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ.
NA28 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· ἀμήν σοι λέγω⸃, σήμερον μετʼ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ.
Swanson WH καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ἀμήν σοι λέγω, σήμερον μετʼ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ
UBS4 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Ἀμήν σοι λέγω, σήμερον μετʼ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ.


I suppose the conditionalist who holds the soul sleep could agree with line 1 above and say that the person is alive after his death and will be with Jesus in paradise, though the person is unconscious. I find this to be weak, but it is a possibility from their perspective. However, line 2 is seriously problematic in light of the view held by the well-known annihilationist Edward William Fudge's position found in the second quote near the beginning of this article. Not only is Mr. Fudge's position heretical because it necessitates that the human soul of Jesus ceased to exist upon his death, thereby denying the hypostatic union in the incarnation, but it is also a manifestation of reinterpreting Scripture to make it suit one's presuppositions.

Conclusion
Luke 23:42-43 is where Jesus speaks to the thief on the cross who is next to him and says that the thief would be with him in paradise that very day. At the very least this refutes the conditionalist idea that the person who dies ceases to have life in his soul (per Edward Fudge). Also, the words of Christ challenge the weak notion of soul sleep imposed into this Scripture by the conditionalists. Finally, when we see that there are other verses in the Bible that speak of consciousness after death such as Samuel (1 Sam. 28:11-19). Moses and Elijah (Matt. 17:2-4), Lazarus and Rich man (Luke 16:19-31), Paul (2 Cor. 12:2), the saints (Rev. 6:10), we can easily conclude that Jesus was saying that the thief would be with him, conscious, in paradise shortly after both of them died.
Source: Annihilationism and Luke 23:42-43, the thief with Jesus in the afterlife the day of his death | CARM.org

rrobs said:

A parable. which is a recognized figure of speech. A figure of speech is used to emphasize something. It is not meant to be taken literal. Read the context and you will see that vs 19-31 talk about giving to the poor. Any serious student of scripture should be familiar with figures of speech. Lot's of stuff on the internet on the subject.

Once again, if Luke does say the dead are alive, we contradict what God told Adam and Eve and the other verses that talk about the finality of death (until Jesus comes and resurrects them).

Click to expand...

No, it is not a fictional parable. There is much to suggest that it is a real story.
First, the story is never called a parable. Many other of Jesus' stories are designated as parables, such as the sower and the seed (Luke 8:4); the prosperous farmer (Luke 12:16); the barren fig tree (Luke 13:6); and the wedding feast (Luke 14:7). Second, the story of the rich man and Lazarus uses the actual name of a person. Such specificity would set it apart from ordinary parables, in which the characters are not named.
Third, this particular story does not seem to fit the definition of a parable, which is a presentation of a spiritual truth using an earthly illustration. The story of the rich man and Lazarus presents spiritual truth directly, with no earthly metaphor.
Source: Is Luke 16:19-31 a parable or an account of events that actually occurred? | GotQuestions.org

rrobs said:

Matthew also talks about the transfiguration in Mark 9:4, but it added some information that Mark did not mention.

Matt 17:9,

And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.
They didn't actually see Moses and Elijah. They saw a vision.

Again, since this was a vision it does not contradict God's truth that when people die, they are quite dead and will remain so until the resurrections of Revelation

Click to expand...

Conditionalists might say that because the Transfiguration was a vision, it didn't really happen in real time and Moses and Elijah were not really consciously there. This way, they could maintain their belief in soul sleep and/or the termination of life upon the death of the physical body.

Does this work? No.

1. It says that Jesus took Peter, James, and John and led them up to a mountain (v. 1).
2. Jesus was transfigured before them. This was an actual occurrence upon Christ, not a vision (v. 2).
3. In the Transfiguration, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, and were talking with Jesus (v. 3). The context is of an actual event: Christ's transfiguration.
4. Peter said he wanted to make three tabernacles: one for Jesus, one for Moses, and one for Elijah (v. 4). This is because of what he saw during Christ's actual transfiguration.
5. A then cloud overshadowed them and God the Father spoke saying "This is my beloved son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him!" (v. 5).
6. The disciples then fell facedown to the ground because they each heard the voice (v. 6).
7. Jesus told them to "get up and do not be afraid," (v. 7).
8. They then lifted up their eyes and saw no one except Jesus alone (v. 8).
9. Upon their dissent from the mountain Jesus told them not to tell the vision to anyone until after his resurrection (v. 9).

The context certainly supports the idea that Jesus, Peter, James, and John physically went up to the mountain, saw Jesus transfiguration, and observed him speaking with Moses and Elijah. Furthermore, God the Father spoke upon which they fell to the ground and Jesus then told him not to be afraid. When the lifted up their eyes they saw no one except Jesus. which means that Moses and Elijah were no longer visible. All of this is descriptive of something that actually happened, not a representation of something else.

To be clear, one other caveat in this argument might be that Elijah never died since he was taken to heaven(2 Kings 2:11-13 ; 1 Maccabees 2:58). Nevertheless, Moses did die and so the argument against the conditionalist position still holds true using the Transfiguration of Christ.
Source: Annihilationism, Matthew 17, Christ's transfiguration, Moses, and Elijah | CARM.org

rrobs said:

OK. How do we make this verse fit with the clear teaching of Genesis, that people will die as opposed the the devil's lie that they really don't die? Gotta make it fit somehow!

Click to expand...

As I said before, the human body dies, but not the soul or the spirit. You have to look at the whole context of the Bible to avoid "contradictions".

Base12 said:

Until One understands Reincarnation is Biblical, One will never understand Hell.

Hell is a parable for the Womb and Reincarnation...

The Lake of Fire is simply the portal back to Earth to be born again of corruptible flesh.

Click to expand...

Heb 9:27,

How does reincarnation fit with this verse in Hebrews?

calm said:

Did I tell you we weren't gonna die? Of course people die, but only the body dies, not the soul or the spirit. The soul goes after death into the realm of the dead (Isaiah 38:11) and the spirit goes back to God.(Ecclesiastes 12:7)

No, that's wrong.
In light of this, Luke 23:42-43 is important because it is where the thief is being crucified with Christ and Jesus says to him, "today you shall be with me in paradise." The implication of Christ's words is that the thief, upon his death, would be with Jesus in Paradise. This supports the idea that very soon both of them would be together. And, it stands in contradiction to Edward Fudge's false view that the human soul is deprived of life upon death. Nevertheless, one conditionalist response is to focus on a single ','. That's right, a comma.

1. ", today" 'Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise.'"
   1. ESV, ISV, KJV, LEB, NASB, NCV, NET, NIV, NRSV, RSV, YLT, etc.
2. "today, " 'Truly I say to you today, you shall be with Me in Paradise.'"
   1. NWT (Jehovah's Witness Bible)

In line 1 Jesus is saying that the thief and he would be together that very day in Paradise. In line 2, the interpretation is that Jesus was saying those words that very day. In other words, it as though Jesus was saying "I'm telling you this right now, today, right now I'm telling you that you will be with me in Paradise..." Now, the latter approach is the same as the Jehovah's Witnesses, a non-Christian cult. But, this in no way means that conditionalists are not Christians just because some of them happen use the same argument as the JW's who also are annihilationists. The point is that the translations show the English to represent line 1, not line 2 and this effects interpretation.

I've provided a small table below listing different Greek texts. You don't have to understand Greek to make sense of this. λέγω (lego) is Greek for "I say" and σήμερον (sameron) is Greek for "today." I placed the commas and red that are found in the Greek text as I copied them. You'll notice that the second Greek text does not have a comma in it.

Greek Texts Greek with and without punctuation
These are the words to focus on. Note the , is in red
λέγω (I say), σήμερον (today)
NA26INT καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· ἀμήν σοι λέγω, σήμερον μετ̓ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ
LGNTI καὶ εἶπεν ⸀αὐτῷ· Ἀμήν ⸂σοι λέγω⸃ σήμερον μετʼ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ.
NA27 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· ἀμήν σοι λέγω, σήμερον μετʼ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ.
NA28 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· ἀμήν σοι λέγω⸃, σήμερον μετʼ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ.
Swanson WH καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ἀμήν σοι λέγω, σήμερον μετʼ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ
UBS4 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Ἀμήν σοι λέγω, σήμερον μετʼ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ.


I suppose the conditionalist who holds the soul sleep could agree with line 1 above and say that the person is alive after his death and will be with Jesus in paradise, though the person is unconscious. I find this to be weak, but it is a possibility from their perspective. However, line 2 is seriously problematic in light of the view held by the well-known annihilationist Edward William Fudge's position found in the second quote near the beginning of this article. Not only is Mr. Fudge's position heretical because it necessitates that the human soul of Jesus ceased to exist upon his death, thereby denying the hypostatic union in the incarnation, but it is also a manifestation of reinterpreting Scripture to make it suit one's presuppositions.

Conclusion
Luke 23:42-43 is where Jesus speaks to the thief on the cross who is next to him and says that the thief would be with him in paradise that very day. At the very least this refutes the conditionalist idea that the person who dies ceases to have life in his soul (per Edward Fudge). Also, the words of Christ challenge the weak notion of soul sleep imposed into this Scripture by the conditionalists. Finally, when we see that there are other verses in the Bible that speak of consciousness after death such as Samuel (1 Sam. 28:11-19). Moses and Elijah (Matt. 17:2-4), Lazarus and Rich man (Luke 16:19-31), Paul (2 Cor. 12:2), the saints (Rev. 6:10), we can easily conclude that Jesus was saying that the thief would be with him, conscious, in paradise shortly after both of them died.
Source: Annihilationism and Luke 23:42-43, the thief with Jesus in the afterlife the day of his death | CARM.org


No, it is not a fictional parable. There is much to suggest that it is a real story.
First, the story is never called a parable. Many other of Jesus' stories are designated as parables, such as the sower and the seed (Luke 8:4); the prosperous farmer (Luke 12:16); the barren fig tree (Luke 13:6); and the wedding feast (Luke 14:7). Second, the story of the rich man and Lazarus uses the actual name of a person. Such specificity would set it apart from ordinary parables, in which the characters are not named.
Third, this particular story does not seem to fit the definition of a parable, which is a presentation of a spiritual truth using an earthly illustration. The story of the rich man and Lazarus presents spiritual truth directly, with no earthly metaphor.
Source: Is Luke 16:19-31 a parable or an account of events that actually occurred? | GotQuestions.org


Conditionalists might say that because the Transfiguration was a vision, it didn't really happen in real time and Moses and Elijah were not really consciously there. This way, they could maintain their belief in soul sleep and/or the termination of life upon the death of the physical body.

Does this work? No.

1. It says that Jesus took Peter, James, and John and led them up to a mountain (v. 1).
2. Jesus was transfigured before them. This was an actual occurrence upon Christ, not a vision (v. 2).
3. In the Transfiguration, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, and were talking with Jesus (v. 3). The context is of an actual event: Christ's transfiguration.
4. Peter said he wanted to make three tabernacles: one for Jesus, one for Moses, and one for Elijah (v. 4). This is because of what he saw during Christ's actual transfiguration.
5. A then cloud overshadowed them and God the Father spoke saying "This is my beloved son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him!" (v. 5).
6. The disciples then fell facedown to the ground because they each heard the voice (v. 6).
7. Jesus told them to "get up and do not be afraid," (v. 7).
8. They then lifted up their eyes and saw no one except Jesus alone (v. 8).
9. Upon their dissent from the mountain Jesus told them not to tell the vision to anyone until after his resurrection (v. 9).

The context certainly supports the idea that Jesus, Peter, James, and John physically went up to the mountain, saw Jesus transfiguration, and observed him speaking with Moses and Elijah. Furthermore, God the Father spoke upon which they fell to the ground and Jesus then told him not to be afraid. When the lifted up their eyes they saw no one except Jesus. which means that Moses and Elijah were no longer visible. All of this is descriptive of something that actually happened, not a representation of something else.

To be clear, one other caveat in this argument might be that Elijah never died since he was taken to heaven(2 Kings 2:11-13 ; 1 Maccabees 2:58). Nevertheless, Moses did die and so the argument against the conditionalist position still holds true using the Transfiguration of Christ.
Source: Annihilationism, Matthew 17, Christ's transfiguration, Moses, and Elijah | CARM.org

As I said before, the human body dies, but not the soul or the spirit. You have to look at the whole context of the Bible to avoid "contradictions".

Click to expand...

Do you understand the soul to be nothing more than breath life?

Gen 2:7,

The Hebrew words for "living soul" are "nephesh (soul) chay (living."
The exact same words are used when God created animals.

Gen 1:21,

There are many other scriptures that say this, but these alone should be sufficient to understand that soul is nothing more than breath life. When a person or an animal stops breathing they are no longer a living soul. There is no soul that lives on.

In God's original plan humans had one more part that animals did not have. That would be spirit. God created man in His image and John says that God's image is spirit. Adam lost his spirit when he sinned and that loss was passed on to the rest of us. The new birth is the restoration of that spirit.

Have you tried to find the verses I mentioned that say there is no thought, consciousness, or awareness in death? They may add some light to the matter.

Jos said:

Which is it? All of sudden nowadays I've heard a toned down version of hell from theists where a just God doesn't deservedly send you there to punish you for your sins but you send yourself there by rejecting God's love apparently, and He isn't punishing you but you're punishing yourself. All of sudden it's toned down from version that takes responsibility away from God and places it in our hands, I guess as another way to get God off the hook for anything. So which is it: does God punish us or do we punish ourselves?

Click to expand...

Hell is a place where there are no parties. Everything is all serious all the time and nobody talks to each other. It's totally lame.

Landon Caeli said:

Hell is a place where there are no parties. Everything is all serious all the time and nobody talks to each other. It's totally lame.

Click to expand...

Sounds like you've been there. <Joke>

nPeace said:

Sounds like you've been there. <Joke>

Click to expand...

I've had a sample.

Jos said:

Which is it? All of sudden nowadays I've heard a toned down version of hell from theists where a just God doesn't deservedly send you there to punish you for your sins but you send yourself there by rejecting God's love apparently, and He isn't punishing you but you're punishing yourself. All of sudden it's toned down from version that takes responsibility away from God and places it in our hands, I guess as another way to get God off the hook for anything. So which is it: does God punish us or do we punish ourselves?

Click to expand...

I believe God does punish but I believe Hell is a matter of rejecting salvation from it.

Amanaki said:

If a person ends up in Hell it is from his/her own evil action, words or thoughts done in previous lifes, It is not God or Buddha who send you there, it because of the enormous amount of karma a person accumulate from their bad action, words or thoughts, But when a lot of suffering has been done, the karma will become less, and one may be out of hell at one point.

Click to expand...

I do not believe that is so. Everything can be forgiven.

Fool said:

if God is omnipresent, then how does god send itself anywhere? so if self isn't god, and self is both the cause and the effect, who did what to whom?


a little taste of the dr's own medicine never killed them.


physician heal thyself

Click to expand...

I believe Hell is not a problem for God.