Welcome, Guest
Username Password: Remember me

Stand To Reason (Greg Koukl and Tim Barnett) on CI
(1 viewing) (1) Guest
  • Page:
  • 1

TOPIC: Stand To Reason (Greg Koukl and Tim Barnett) on CI

Stand To Reason (Greg Koukl and Tim Barnett) on CI 5 months ago #5018

  • Chesser
  • OFFLINE
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: 0
itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/stand-to-rea...&i=1000391187345

They say in the introduction that the discussion will address the nature of the punishment (great idea):

I did hear one argument for the nature of the punishment being ECT that's new to me (in addition to the “weeping and gnashing of teeth” being concise torment).

Paraphrasing; Greg thinks going “into outer darkness” (Matt 25:30) is "spatial language" requiring a spatial, resurrected, judged wicked, person to occupy that ‘space’. So in the very next parable, where Jesus says “depart into eternal punishment” (Matt 25:46), He thus means one aspect of the nature of the punishment as spatial. Which is consistent with the spatial aspect of the nature of the penalty/punishment Paul uses in 2 Thess 1:9. The damned are “away from the presence of the Lord and the glory of His strength”.

Makes some sense, I suppose. But I’m not sure how an annihilated person (i.e. they occupy no space) isn’t just as much “away from” the space Jesus occupies in the New Heavens/Earth as a physical body experiencing ECT in the outer darkness space would be.

I mean just how ‘dark’ is nothing and how ‘outside’ is being nowhere? Just how ‘dark and outside’ of Jesus’ light and presence is “outer darkness” given annihilation??? Sounds pretty dark and outside to me, to be annihilated completed. Destroyed in Hell, both body and soul (Matt 10:28) which oddly enough didn’t come up in the discussion.

Re: Stand To Reason (Greg Koukl and Tim Barnett) on CI 5 months ago #5019

  • DTM
  • OFFLINE
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 24
  • Karma: 0
Welcome to the boards, Chesser!

I didn't listen to the podcast, so I can't say for sure what they're trying to get at, but here is my guess: The Scripture citations all indicate the lost being sent somewhere, that is, to a place. Now, if you're going to be in a place, you have to exist. Santa Claus is not sitting in my office, or at the North Pole, or in any other place, for the simple reason that he doesn't exist. Someone who is annihilated and no longer exists can't be in any particular place.

OK, I fully agree: those who are sent to Hell will be in Hell. But that has nothing to do with whether they stay in Hell forever, or for some limited amount of time before they are destroyed. We may say that a condemned murderer is "sent to the electric chair" or "sent to the gallows", but that doesn't mean they'll stay there any longer than is needed to discharge the sentence of death.

This is yet another argument that is absolutely right, and absolutely irrelevant.
Last Edit: 5 months ago by DTM.

Re: Stand To Reason (Greg Koukl and Tim Barnett) on CI 4 months, 4 weeks ago #5021

  • Chesser
  • OFFLINE
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: 0
DTM wrote:

I didn't listen to the podcast,

Are you sure (just kidding) because your guess is spot on. They then say (via progressive Revelation) that John's Revelation has the final word on the nature of the punishment in this space and it describes this "space" called Hell as a space of eternal torment for the Devil and his demons (which is also correct). You know the verse I'm sure. Which to my knowledge is the only verse in the entire Bible that describes Hell as eternal torment. Problem is, the wicked unforgiven humans are not the Devil or his demons. Why anyone would think humans can survive in a place prepared for demons, I have no idea. Anymore than a human can survive in the Sea with a milestone tied around his neck. And "progressive" doesn't mean contradictory (with death and destruction clearly meant from Genesis to Peter/Jude).

I'm surprised at Greg's breakdown in logic here but recognize the struggle to "rethink". If I were to guess, I'd guess he's actually doing some rethinking of Hell as we speak. Due in large part to RH's team. Which is why he's devoted some broadcasts to the subject.

I know Chris has interacted with him in the past.

Re: Stand To Reason (Greg Koukl and Tim Barnett) on CI 4 months, 3 weeks ago #5025

  • webb
  • OFFLINE
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 488
  • Karma: 17
Greg thinks going “into outer darkness” (Matt 25:30) is "spatial language" requiring a spatial, resurrected, judged wicked, person to occupy that ‘space’. So in the very next parable, where Jesus says “depart into eternal punishment” (Matt 25:46), He thus means one aspect of the nature of the punishment as spatial. Which is consistent with the spatial aspect of the nature of the penalty/punishment Paul uses in 2 Thess 1:9. The damned are “away from the presence of the Lord and the glory of His strength”.
Jesus is referring both in Mt. 25:41 and in Mt. 25:46 to Isa. 24:21-23. In that passage rebellious angelic beings and rebellious human beings are subjected to a lengthy incarceration in the underworld of the dead together. The same pattern is found in Rev. 20:1-6. The devil is sent to the abyss, where readers know dead people (Rev. 17:8; cf. 13:18; Rom. 10:7) and demons (9:1-11) are imprisoned. In 20:4-5 a judgment (trial) scene is described, in which those dead who resisted the beast come to life and reign for a thousand years--a nice round number for an age to last--and the rest of the dead are refused resurrection for the age. They are, in the thought world of Revelation, left incarcerated in the underworld (called "Hades," when referring to humans; see Rev. 1:18)--not coincidentally, they are imprisoned in the same place for the same age-long sentence as the devil (see 20:3, 5, 7). Among other possible nuances of aiwnios (αἰώνιος, Strong's G166), often rendered as "everlasting" or "eternal"), is the sense "age-long" or "characteristic of an age." The devil and his angels are shut up in the prison of the underworld along with the unrepentant dead for the whole age, when God and his Christ, Jesus, come to reign in glory--just as in Isa. 24:21-23 and Mt. 25:41, 46.

This will be a totally different interpretation than you will probably have heard before. If I am correct--and I have a fair amount of evidence on my side--an "eternal punishment" is neither everlasting torment nor annihilation, which is also, in its own way, everlasting. An "eternal punishment" is a punishment that lasts for a long, long time, namely for the whole first thousand-year-long age of God's and Christ's and the saints' kingdom, which continues without end, or in the language of Daniel 7:17 and Revelation 22:5, not only "for the age," but "for/to the ages of the ages." As you may know, the Greek word for "age," aiwn (αἰών), Strong's G165, is the noun from which aiwnios is formed.
Last Edit: 4 months, 3 weeks ago by webb. Reason: forgot to italicize transliterated word

Re: Stand To Reason (Greg Koukl and Tim Barnett) on CI 4 months, 2 weeks ago #5040

  • Singalphile
  • OFFLINE
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 225
  • Karma: 11
Like yourself and DTM, I don't see the relevance. To say that eternal/aiónios punishment occurs in a spatial place, doesn't necessarily tell us anything dispositive about the nature of that punishment.

2 Thess does not say that the eternal destruction occurs "away" from the presence of the Lord, though one could interpret it that way, but I'd argue that that's a less likely interpretation.

It sounds like they're stretching, which is understandable. Everyone does that here or there when trying to form a systematic theology about something that the Bible doesn't actually provide.

Side note about STR:

It would be nice if he would have guest Christians who disagree with him. One reason I haven't listened in a good long while is because he was not doing that, and what's worse, he's confident about his various systematic theologies. That's not a good recipe for me.

He seemed to think that a critique of a viewpoint by a trusted Christian is just as good as actually reading or listening to the opposing viewpoint directly (whether the different view is another Christian's or not). In my experience, it never, ever is, and it's dangerous to ignore that, imo. So when I agreed with him, I could not be sure that I was getting all the info/arguments (so it wasn't helpful), and when I disagreed, it was demoralizing to see him overlooking points that I thought were so obvious.

I think he could avoid all that by being more humble about his own views and acknowledging other views more positively, even when it comes to truly anti-Christian worldviews.
"Singalphile" - Name chosen (hastily) to indicate being on a narrow path, pursuing the love of God. Male, upper-30's, USA.
Last Edit: 4 months, 2 weeks ago by Singalphile.
  • Page:
  • 1
Time to create page: 0.55 seconds
Featured audio: Dr. Al Mohler & Chris Date debate
"Should Christians rethink Hell?" on Unbelievable?