Welcome, Guest
Username Password: Remember me

Sodom and Gomorrah: A Prefigure and Type
(1 viewing) (1) Guest
  • Page:
  • 1
  • 2

TOPIC: Sodom and Gomorrah: A Prefigure and Type

Sodom and Gomorrah: A Prefigure and Type 6 months ago #5109

  • timsimmk
  • OFFLINE
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 33
  • Karma: 0
Has anyone made any response to Hiram Diaz's points raised here?

www.biblicaltrinitarian.com/2016/11/sodo...figure-and-type.html

Re: Sodom and Gomorrah: A Prefigure and Type 6 months ago #5110

  • DTM
  • NOW ONLINE
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 28
  • Karma: 0
I'm not aware of anyone else, but I'll tell you my response.

His point is that the meaning of Peter's verse is that the ungodly will surely be judged, just as Sodom and Gomorrah were judged. But that need not mean that their fate must be exactly the same. Well, OK, if the verse were only talking about judgement. That is, if Peter had written something like, "...by judging (or condemning, etc.) the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, he made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly...", then Diaz would have an excellent point. Trying to stretch that into a specific fate as a result of that judgement would be overreaching. But that's not what Peter wrote. He specifically stated that it was turning to ashes and condemning to extinction that was the example. If Peter meant only to indicate that there would be a judgement, he could have used any number of examples. Why choose as an example the one thing that absolutely was not going to happen?

Now, he also references Jude 7, but never really delves into it. The reason will be clear if you read the verse carefully. It says that the cities serve as an example "by undergoing the punishment of eternal fire". In Peter, the incineration of the cities is stated as being the example. In Jude, the punishment by eternal fire is not the example. The cities are offered as an example of the ungodly who are judged. Putting it another way, Jude doesn't say that the cities are an example of judgement by eternal fire, which would allow Diaz some flexibility in interpreting just how close of an example they are. Jude instead says they actually underwent punishment by eternal fire. That's not an example or hypodeigma , it's not given as a symbol or a type. It's clearly stated as an instance. So when Scripture tells us that the ungodly will be punished with eternal fire, we have an actual instance of what that looks like, and what is the result.
Last Edit: 6 months ago by DTM. Reason: typo correction
The following user(s) said Thank You: John Haak, SarahsKnight

Re: Sodom and Gomorrah: A Prefigure and Type 6 months ago #5111

  • Piqsid
  • OFFLINE
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Posts: 10
  • Karma: 0
First, Diaz is using a straw man argument here. He quotes several Conditionalists who all say that this passage serves as an “example of what will happen to the wicked.” That is as far as any of them say. Some of them add emphasis to the passage with italics or quotes, but all they do is quote scripture. Diaz then states that this is an assertion that the final judgement must be “exactly” the same. But no one is claiming that. He then goes on to show how the word used in the passage does not mean “exactly” the same. Fine, no one probably argues with him. I don’t think any conditionalist thinks that during judgement fire will literally rain down from heaven to destroy the lost as it literally did to Sodom and Gamora.

Second, conditionalists don’t take this illustration in isolation. Right in this passage it also talks about those who died in Noah’s flood. Then there is Jesus’ parable of the wheat and the tares. There is the destruction of Edom in Isaiah 34. There is the destruction of the Canaanites by Joshua. There is the description in Malachi 4. And many others. All of these in their own way serve as examples of what God will do to the wicked during judgement. The example of Sodom and Gomora is just one brick in a very large wall.

Re: Sodom and Gomorrah: A Prefigure and Type 5 months, 2 weeks ago #5145

  • timsimmk
  • OFFLINE
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 33
  • Karma: 0
That would be my thinking, that this verse when taken with the myriad of others that use the analogy of complete burning up, this verse shows conclusively that God is telling us that "apollumi" and "olethros" should be used in their primary literal meaning of total destruction, and not any metaphorical meaning of loss or ruin.

I was reading the information under Jude 7 on the main RethinkingHell page and it emphasises that the word in Jude 7 is "deigma", not "hypodeigma" meaning and actual specimen, and actual sample of the eternal fire, which goes against any suggestion that it's just talking about how God will not fail to punish the wicked, but what that punishment consists of.

One thing I am confused by though, is that it speaks about the wicked having suffered the punishment of eternal fire, doesn't the present active tense in Jude 7 imply that they are presently, and continuously suffering the punishment of eternal fire, leading traditionalists to interpret Jude 7 as referring to a continuous, eternal state of suffering for the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, and not their one-time punishment with eternal results?

Re: Sodom and Gomorrah: A Prefigure and Type 5 months, 2 weeks ago #5146

  • DTM
  • NOW ONLINE
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 28
  • Karma: 0
timsimmk wrote:
One thing I am confused by though, is that it speaks about the wicked having suffered the punishment of eternal fire, doesn't the present active tense in Jude 7 imply that they are presently, and continuously suffering the punishment of eternal fire, leading traditionalists to interpret Jude 7 as referring to a continuous, eternal state of suffering for the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, and not their one-time punishment with eternal results?


I'm not sure I'm following you on this; maybe it's a translation issue. I use the ESV, and it doesn't refer to "having suffered", rather "...serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire." And, actually, that may support your point even better. I'll come back to that.

"Having suffered" is not present active, I believe that would be a form of present perfect, indicating it's already completed, which, of course, ties in perfectly with CI. Thus, I'm having trouble understanding your question.

Now, if the ESV is accurate, then "undergoing a punishment of eternal fire" sure sounds like it's still happening. I would expect that to be "...serve as an example by having undergone a punishment of eternal fire." But I think that's one of those cases where my version's grammar is almost excruciatingly correct. (Some of my friends call me "Conan the Grammarian".) People just don't use excruciatingly correct grammar. In addition, the "historical present"--speaking of past events in the present tense--is legitimate and is done to make them more vivid, as Jude might want to do here. Besides, remaining reduced to ashes and smoke even to this day is part of undergoing the punishment of eternal fire, so in a sense, the punishment is ongoing as long as they remain incinerated: that is, forever.

So I would say there is some ambiguity in the grammar, but I don't think that a bit of ambiguity can override the image of the wicked being completely and permanently destroyed. And let's face it: if the image were of people being kept alive while suffering horrendously in the flames, would the defenders of ECT let us ignore that image by appealing to ambiguous grammar?

Re: Sodom and Gomorrah: A Prefigure and Type 5 months, 2 weeks ago #5147

  • timsimmk
  • OFFLINE
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 33
  • Karma: 0
The issue with grammar that I'm referring to was raised by Matt Slick here:

m.youtube .com/ watch?v=jB14ITo0I6Y
Last Edit: 5 months, 2 weeks ago by timsimmk.
  • Page:
  • 1
  • 2
Time to create page: 0.55 seconds
Featured audio: Dr. Al Mohler & Chris Date debate
"Should Christians rethink Hell?" on Unbelievable?