OK Pancho.
I don't see any conflict in scripture.
Everything in Scripture should be taken literally first, unless there is a compelling reason for not taking it literally. There are many, many places in Scripture where it talks about the suffering in Hell being eternal, everlasting, without end, etc., and there is nothing in Scripture anywhere that gives any hint of the idea that there will be a reprieve, parole, or redemption from Hell at any point. These are not my ideas, they are God's Word to us, and as I said, they should be taken absolutely literally.
The wicked have the same hope of redemption that I have. I was wicked also, before I found Jesus.
It is not a matter of can't. God is not in the business of giving chances over and over (reincarnation, etc.). He gives ONE chance for us to demonstrate our love for Him. If we demonstrate our love for Him in this one life, then we spend eternity in Heaven with Him. If we demonstrate hatred, or apathy, or contempt, or any other attitude toward Him we will spend eternity in Hell away from Him.
I agree, there is no one who does not have the opportunity to be saved.
The universe was created first, then the spirits of mankind (Gen 2:7). The spirits in Job 38:7 are the Angels, not man's spirits. Each man's spirit is made the moment we are conceived.
Col 1:23 does not refer back to a time before Creation. The Gospel of Jesus was not proclaimed until after Jesus was born, lived, died, and was resurrected. It was foreshadowed, predicted to come, anticipated, and hoped for, but it was not proclaimed until after it was fulfilled.
Again, you ignore what Scripture says.
Can a false christ save a person if they believe in an unbiblical Jesus ? yes or no
There is nothing in the language of any verse which contradicts the possible interpretation of our pre-conception existence which is only rejected by the interpretation of the language of a verse, not the language itself. In Job 38:7 you interpret Sons of GOD to be restricted to what you believe are the angels, an interpretation you hold by faith, not by any proof as you hint/imply that you do but the actual face value of language says and is therefore more readily interpreted to be read as it is written, ALL the sons of GOD, including me and thee.
Again, I only ignore your interpretation of scripture and offer another possibility that does not have any support for blasphemy within it...
The elect were predestined to be conformed to His image, no one else, if they should ever sin.
The "possible interpretation"? So instead of arguing surety, you argue your "possible interpretation"? We do, however, know that Jesus was the only soul that came from Heaven (the only source of creation) before residing in His human body. No other soul preexisted its residence in its human body.
The word translated "return" can just as easily mean "turn toward". You see in this a "return" to Sheol as if that is where we originated. But it is more accurately understood to be that those who forget God will be turned from life to death and into Sheol.
The parable is not about the planting of the seeds, but about the harvest of them. Satan can no more create or move God's seeds (the souls of man) than you or I can. He can only manipulate us. He does not plant the souls, but the spirit of evil within our souls.
"If they should ever sin"? Everyone sins. There is none righteous, not even one.
"His first proclamation of His deity"? There is not a single soul that has EVER accepted His first proclamation of His deity without rebellion (Rom 1:20-21).
The only pov that matters is God's pov, which He gives us in His Scriptures. All have sinned (ignored His power and authority over them) and prostituted themselves with other gods. instead of making God foremost in their hearts.
Let me share with you what I find to be two compelling reasons for not taking those words literally
The Character of God is that He cannot abide evil, and He cannot lie. He has said that He will send those who are evil to a place where He, and His glory, and His power are not. And that this will be an unending, eternal, ever-lasting, day and night forever banishment.
Yes, this is metaphorical, in that it was something that the people there understood clearly, but was amplified to the nth degree. It is impossible for humans to understand the spiritual world except in terms of the physical world. Paul and John try to describe Heaven, but their language is completely inadequate to the task because they must relate it to what we already know.
Most certainly, that is the picture that Jesus is painting. He does not call us to do so, but to be willing to do so if that were what it took to enter Heaven and avoid Hell.
What is a "lake of fire"? It is not a large area that causes constant pain, torment, destruction, and misery. Yes, we should take that literally.
Again, an image of pain, terror, torment. Worms and maggots eat only dead flesh, thereby cleansing the living flesh of disease and wounds. But in Hell, there will be nothing but dead and dying "flesh", and the "worms" (whatever they may really be) will cause pain, terror, and torment without end.
Indeed, just as the bush that attracted Moses burned but was not consumed.
Certainly God cannot abide evil. Then, how a perfectly loving and just God deals with evil ? What solution does He give to that problem?
Do you think that there is place where He, His glory and His power are not?
Well, in the same way that you give these words a symbolic meaning, I take "everlasting" as figurative language.
He exiles evil away from Himself, forever.
Absolutely there is, or will be, a place where He and the glory of His power are not. Does it exist now? I don't know, but it will by the time Judgement comes.
Because He told us that it would be there at that time.
And your interpretation of that phrase means that He will save every soul, regardless of their sin or their lack of love and commitment to God?
They may not be literal, but are figurative of the pain, suffering, torment, terror, etc. that will be experienced there.
You are still applying these things to this life. "Time, or money, or attention, or drugs, or even suicide..." are all part of this world, but have no relevance to the spiritual world.
If the parallel of eternal torment is eternal life, and eternal life cannot be taken away, nor will it fade away, or be temporary, then what makes you think that eternal torment will be taken away, fade away, or be temporary? Let's be consistent with our understanding here. If eternal means eternal in one case, then it means the same in the other as well. You don't get eternal reward without also having eternal punishment.
We take it like any thing/
No, absolutely no.
Yes, I agree. In the same sense, I believe that "everlasting" is figurative of the inescapable nature of the suffering by human means.
That's exactly the tragedy of hell in the afterlife.
"Eternal" has the same meaning for both eternal life and eternal torment.
