Seventh Day Adventist Teachings On Hell

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maria1212
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Protestant101 said:
Again Christ is quoted in the very last chapter of the Bible, “And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.” Revelation 22:12. Here He reminds us that “every man”–every person–will receive his just reward when Christ returns to this earth.

Job declares “that the wicked is reserved to the day of destruction. They shall be brought forth to the day of wrath.”

Daniel wrote that they which “sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” Daniel 12:2.

Can there be any doubt where the wicked are reserved before facing resurrection, judgment, and punishment? We have the testimony of Peter, Daniel, Job and the Master Himself. There is no room to debate this one. They are reserved in the grave.
Click to expand...
This post, and the several preceeding it, is typical Adventist boilerplate. A paragraph of emotional appeal, with a snippet of bible verses from here and there partially quoted so as to seem supportive of the pre concieved assumption. Don 't buy it !

Adventists use an emotional appeal against an eternal hell to establish their doctrine that we do not have an immortal soul.

Denying that we have an eternal soul is directly in contradiction to the bible and to established Christian teaching.

It also contradicts what Jesus himself said to us:

“Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matthew 10:28 NASB.)

The idea that we are just animals, with no immortal soul, who sleep in the dust until Jesus comes, also contradicts what St. Paul says that to be absent from the body is to be present with Christ. (2 Cor. 5:8)

Adventist teaching that we have no immortal soul distorts Christian teaching on the nature of God. Remember we are made in his image, and God is Spirit, not a finite material being.

The council of Calcedon, in 451 soundly condemned the idea that we do not have an immortal soul. This was also a council that helped define the nature of Christ, fully God and fully human. The two are linked. Denying one truth leads to a distortion and ultimate denial of the other. Many of the founders of Adventism (James White, Joseph Bates) were admittedly Arian, denying the Trinity. While modern adventists profess a belief in the trinity, close examination of their teaching reveals that their core doctrines still suffer from the distortion of the original non-christian position.

MarysRoses
 
“Typical Adventist Boilerplate?” I haven’t heard that one before. Thanks; I learned something new. 😃

May I ask, please, about the “council of Calcedon, in 451?” What is that, who took part in or presided in it? I would find that interesting to learn more about.

I have much more to say about your last post, but I will not have time for a while. ASAP. 🙂
 
**Protestant
**
(my words in bold, yours in regular font)

Using Thayer’s Greek Definitions; we see that the word “suffering” as used in Jude 1:7 can have two possible meanings. One is “to hold under, to put under, or place underneath.” The second, and more likely intention of the author is “metaphorically to sustain, undergo; to suffer punishment.”

**Protestant, I can’t agree that this is merely symbolic or metaphorically speaking. The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were real cities, the punishment they received was a real punishment, in my opinion there is not reason to believe that his verse is merely metaphorical. **

The first important fact about hell is this: The unsaved do not go to any place of punishment as soon as they die, but are reserved in the grave until the day of judgment to be punished.

**You’re assuming that they are not judged at death. In Catholicism, like Adventism, we believe in two judgments, the particular judgment and the general judgment. The particular judgment takes place at death. The general judgment, of the whole world, takes place at the second coming. **

Christ explicitly taught this truth in the well-known parable of the wheat and the tares.

**This parable is not contrary to Catholic teaching in anyway. Christ definitively taught the suffering of the evil prior to the general judgment in the narrative of the Rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16:**22 The poor man died and was carried away by the angels to be with Abraham. The rich man also died and was buried.
23 In Hades, where he was being tormented, he looked up and saw Abraham far away with Lazarus by his side.
24 He called out, 'Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in agony in these flames.'
25 But Abraham said, 'Child, remember that during your lifetime you received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in agony.
Here we see Christ teaching that the dead are tormented after death, in agony, and the righteous are taken by Angels to paradise. I know that Adventists generally view this as a parable, but even if you accept that this is a parable (which I do not) then you still must deal with that fact that in the parable, Christ would be using false doctrine (i.e. the torment of the wicked at death and the survival of the spirit) in his parable. Something which I, to date, have not seen an Adventist accept.

No one can simplify the parable by enlarging on what Jesus said. It is so clear that a child can understand it. He said the tares represented the wicked people, and that they would be cast into the fire “at the end of the world.”

**We agree with this… as I said before, it is called the General Judgment. **

It was in the harvest that the separation would take place, and He plainly stated, “The harvest is the end of the world.” How can anyone misconstrue these words of Christ?

**The parable is about those alive at the second coming, Christ says nothing in his parable about the tares ceasing to exist, then being re-constituted in order to be separated. Both the Wheat and Tares were alive in the field (earth) when the harvest began. **

The whole idea of the wicked going into the fire at the time of death contradicts our Lord’s specific teaching that they would be cast into the fire at the end of the world.

Actually, as I already pointed out in Luke 16, Christ very much supports this belief. Those wicked alive at the second coming (harvest) will be thrown into the fire. **There is no contradiction here. I believe you are trying to use this text out of context, the passage clearly refers to those alive at the second coming.
**
**
Continued **
 
Peter declared, “The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished.” 2 Peter 2:9. That certainly makes sense, doesn’t it? Suppose a man should be brought into the court accused of stealing, and the judge said, “Put him away for ten years; then we’ll try his case.” Listen, even a human judge would not be that unfair! He would be impeached for such an action. Surely God would not be guilty of such a farce.

No God is not guilty of a farce, we are judged upon death in the Particular Judgment, btw… let me show you these verses in a few other translations, I don’t believe this verse supports what your trying to say.****(2 Pet 2:9 NIV) if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment.
(2 Pet 2:9 NASB) then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment,
(2 Pet 2:9 NRSV) then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trial, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment
(2 Pet 2:9 NKJV) then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment,
**What we see in this verse is that God punishes the ungodly up until the final judgment and after. **

If we let the Bible mean what it says, there can be no doubt on this point. The wicked are “reserved” until when? Until the “day of judgment.” To be what? “To be punished”! This means they cannot be punished before that judgment day. Does the Bible tell where they are reserved until then?

The verse does not support your interpretation as I have shown by using other versions of the text. As the Ryrie Study notes say:****“Vs. 2:9 The unrighteous not only will be punished in the lake of fire but also … in the intermediate place of hades between death and the lake of fire (Luke 16:19-31).”
If plainer words are needed, listen to Jesus speaking in Luke 14:14, “Thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.” Or hear Him again in Matthew 16:27, “For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.” When is “then”? When He comes with His angels. No reward or recompense is handed out until the resurrection of the just, when He comes with all the angels. These verses are beyond controversy. Taken in their context, they contain no ambiguity or hidden meaning.

**Yes… our final reward is handed out at the General Judgement, this does not indicate a lack of existence until then though. For just as Christ said in Luke 16, the holy man was taken by Angels upon his death to paradise. We see also that Paul believed very strongly that to be dead in the body meant that he would be with Christ. **

“(2 Cor 5:8 NASB) We are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord.”

Notice here that Paul says that he would rather by apart from his body, or absent in body, and be at home with Christ. The problem of the Adventist position is even more pronounced in:

“(Phil 1:22 NASB) But if I am to live on in the flesh, this will mean fruitful labor for me; and I do not know which to choose. (Phil 1:23NASB**) But I am hard-pressed from both directions, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better; (Phil 1:24NASB****) yet to remain on in the flesh is more necessary for your sake.”**

Here Paul is faced with a conflict within himself, his desire to depart and be with Christ (not depart and be unconscious), or to remain “IN THE FLESH” or in his body and work among the Christians. Would Paul seriously say that it would be “very much better” to die and be unconscious”? No… Paul, an apostle of Christ was certain that his death meant that he would “depart and be with Christ”.
 
I think it’s important to note that, biblically, one can be “reserved until the judgment” IN a state of temporal punishment:

For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of deepest darkness to be kept until the judgement . . . (2 Pet 2:4).

Now I am not suggesting that the above verse in any way addresses the destiny of wicked humans; it only describes the state of the wicked angels. However, it does indicate that one’s reservation “until the judgment” can occur in a state of punishment. The notions of a particular and general judgment are not mutually exclusive.
 
I think it’s important to note that, biblically, one can be “reserved until the judgment” IN a state of temporal punishment:
For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of deepest darkness to be kept until the judgement . . . (2 Pet 2:4).

Now I am not suggesting that the above verse in any way addresses the destiny of wicked humans; it only describes the state of the wicked angels. However, it does indicate that one’s reservation “until the judgment” can occur in a state of punishment. The notions of a particular and general judgment are not mutually exclusive.
 
Protestant101 said:
If plainer words are needed, listen to Jesus speaking in Luke 14:14, “Thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.” Or hear Him again in Matthew 16:27, “For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.” When is “then”? When He comes with His angels. No reward or recompense is handed out until the resurrection of the just, when He comes with all the angels. These verses are beyond controversy. Taken in their context, they contain no ambiguity or hidden meaning.
Click to expand...
I do not believe that one can exclude the notion of a temporal reward simply because Christ prophesies that the righteous will receive their recompense “at the resurrection of the just.” We have at least one indication in the New Testament that the saints do receive a temporal reward between death and the resurrection: Rev 6:11 (where the "souls of those who had bee slain’ receive white robes as a temporary compensation for theit sufferings, while being told to “wait a little while longer” for the fullness of their vindication.)

I encourage Adventists to at least consider a unique feature of this scripture. Why are the dead portrayed as receiving any sort of temporary reward at all? Parallel passages in contemporary apocalyptic texts that also portray the souls of the dead crying out for vindication (a common motif in Jewish apocalyptic: 1 Enoch 9; 22, and 4 Ezra 4) do not offer the souls any temporary recognition. In those texts, the souls are only instructed to continue waiting by their angelic hosts.

Now, let’s ignore for a second all questions related to the state of the dead. At the very least, whatever this passage means, this passage reconciles the experience of a temporary vindication to the anticipation of a future, full vindication. Accordingly, the two concepts are not mutually exclusive.

(The fact that the passage is set in the intermediate state [that is, a state between death and the resurrection] is significant to Catholics, but not essential to my point.)
 
The human family is an imperfect example of the perfect family, that of the Holy Trinity.

As God has created all with the desire for his creation to know and love him as he loved us so much to send his Son for us,

He created us not to be annihilated. There is no basis to think this, as he created us in His image, and God is eternal. Therefore our very souls are eternal.

God is just. He forces no man to return this love.

The persons in Hell will be there, because they would rather be there than glorifying God for an eternity.

God has made a place for them to dwell in eternity.

This is not creul, or in any way incomprehensible.

The only one that wishes for us not to believe in Hell is Satan himself.
In so doing, he takes away any fear from the sinner of facing judgement day.

Being annihilated is hardly just.

Its hardly even a deterent for someone who has no desire to make a firm purpose of ammendment to their lives, or has placed no value on life.

If annihilation was in fact the truth as to where the damned’s fate would wind up, this would render God as nonsensical and far from just.

I suggest reading Peter Kreeft.

May all anti-trinitarians come to know the truth to avoid the wretchedness their souls will suffer.
 
adventistnomore said:
I think it’s important to note that, biblically, one can be “reserved until the judgment” IN a state of temporal punishment:
For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of deepest darkness to be kept until the judgement . . . (2 Pet 2:4).

Now I am not suggesting that the above verse in any way addresses the destiny of wicked humans; it only describes the state of the wicked angels. However, it does indicate that one’s reservation “until the judgment” can occur in a state of punishment. The notions of a particular and general judgment are not mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...
What version of the Bible are you using?
 
I would also be interested to hear from Catholics, or from other Protestants on this board, what do you think of the following types of quotes, as in this one by Jonathan Edwards, taken from his sermon: “Sinners In The Hands Of An Angry God.”
The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider, or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked: his wrath towards you burns like fire; he looks upon you as worthy of nothing else, but to be cast into the fire; he is of purer eyes than to bear to have you in his sight; you are ten thousand times more abominable in his eyes, than the most hateful venomous serpent is in ours.
Click to expand...
You have offended him infinitely more than ever a stubborn rebel did his prince; and yet it is nothing but his hand that holds you from falling into the fire every moment. It is to be ascribed to nothing else, that you did not go to hell the last night; that you was suffered to awake again in this world, after you closed your eyes to sleep. And there is no other reason to be given, why you have not dropped into hell since you arose in the morning,
but that God’s hand has held you up. There is no other reason to be given why you have not gone to hell, since you have sat here in the house of God, provoking his pure eyes by your sinful wicked manner of attending his solemn worship. Yea, there is nothing else that is to be given as a reason why you do not this very moment drop down into hell.
Click to expand...
O sinner! Consider the fearful danger you are in: it is a great furnace of wrath, a wide and bottomless pit, full of the fire of wrath, that you are held over in the hand of that God, whose wrath is provoked and incensed as much against you, as against many of the damned in hell. You hang by a slender thread, with the flames of divine wrath flashing about it, and ready every moment to singe it, and burn it asunder; and you have no interest in
any Mediator, and nothing to lay hold of to save yourself, nothing to keep off the flames of wrath, nothing of your own, nothing that you ever have done, nothing that you can do, to induce God to spare you one moment. —
Click to expand...
I noticed that a poster above mentioned that they thought it made God very unjust if He really did “annihilate” people in the end, yet, I am one who has suffered severe burns over large tracts of my body, (mostly 3rd degree) and I know personally what it feels like to be literally fried to a crisp…I cannot imagine a God who would do such a thing to anyone for all of eternity! How does that make Him just?

I have more to say to other points above; but I will have to be away for a bit…🙂
 
Protestant101 said:
I would also be interested to hear from Catholics, or from other Protestants on this board, what do you think of the following types of quotes, as in this one by Jonathan Edwards, taken from his sermon: “Sinners In The Hands Of An Angry God.”

I noticed that a poster above mentioned that they thought it made God very unjust if He really did “annihilate” people in the end, yet, I am one who has suffered severe burns over large tracts of my body, (mostly 3rd degree) and I know personally what it feels like to be literally fried to a crisp…I cannot imagine a God who would do such a thing to anyone for all of eternity! How does that make Him just?

I have more to say to other points above; but I will have to be away for a bit…🙂
Click to expand...
That poster would be me.

You can address me if you wish.

I would be happy to speak to the issues you are faced with.

Good night and God be with you
 
I
Protestant101 said:
I would also be interested to hear from Catholics, or from other Protestants on this board, what do you think of the following types of quotes, as in this one by Jonathan Edwards, taken from his sermon: “Sinners In The Hands Of An Angry God.”
Click to expand...
Catholics aren’t about to defend the words of an 18th century anti-Catholic Calvinist preacher. Still, I find emotional arguments entirely inappropriate when touching theological matters. One thing is certain: God’s wrath is infinitely more terrifying than Edwards’ description of it. If you are objecting to the horror of his illustrations of God’s anger, believe me, I wish God’s anger against sin was only as horrifying as what Edwards describes. He is Yahweh, “the consuming fire,” the God who appeared on Sinai: “Indeed, so fearful was the spectacle that Moses said, ‘I am terrified and trembling.’” (He 12:21). Fear. Fear. There is no other response when you find yourself guilty on the last day.
 
adventistnomore said:
I

Catholics aren’t about to defend the words of an 18th century anti-Catholic Calvinist preacher. Still, I find emotional arguments entirely inappropriate when touching theological matters. One thing is certain: God’s wrath is infinitely more terrifying than Edwards’ description of it. If you are objecting to the horror of his illustrations of God’s anger, believe me, I wish God’s anger against sin was only as horrifying as what Edwards describes. He is Yahweh, “the consuming fire,” the God who appeared on Sinai: “Indeed, so fearful was the spectacle that Moses said, ‘I am terrified and trembling.’” (He 12:21). Fear. Fear. There is no other response when you find yourself guilty on the last day.
Click to expand...
Unless you have been fed lies by the serpent who tempts.
 
Protestant101 said:
I would also be interested to hear from Catholics, or from other Protestants on this board, what do you think of the following types of quotes, as in this one by Jonathan Edwards, taken from his sermon: “Sinners In The Hands Of An Angry God.”

I noticed that a poster above mentioned that they thought it made God very unjust if He really did “annihilate” people in the end, yet, I am one who has suffered severe burns over large tracts of my body, (mostly 3rd degree) and I know personally what it feels like to be literally fried to a crisp…I cannot imagine a God who would do such a thing to anyone for all of eternity! How does that make Him just?

I have more to say to other points above; but I will have to be away for a bit…🙂
Click to expand...
Hi Protestant 101,

I have a lot to comment on but won`t have time to get to it until the weekend (if lucky). But in the interim, I wanted to remind you that God respects our free will. It would be unjust not to. If we choose to reject God by committing grave/mortal sin, and persist in rejecting Him and His mercy until death, then we are choosing hell. I would like to reiterate that God does not send people to hell. People who go to hell chose to be separated from him, and use their free will to go there. God does not force people to love him, or to follow His ways. God does not force us to be with Him if we do not want to. A person sends himself to hell by freely setting his will against God.

Those permanently turned against God, get what they want–permanent separation. Moreover, God does not cause suffering in hell. The lack of God`s presence, which men and women are made for, is the chief torment of hell. God allows us to suffer the results of rejecting Him, but God does not directly will or cause those results.

Finally, I agree with SDA2RC, in that using the appeal to emotions, which you have done throughout your posts, does nothing to support what you say. It merely is an attempt to distract, or divert, the readers attention from the theological holes in your argument. I am sure you do not mean it this way, but that is how it comes across. Using an appeal to ones emotions might work well in a court room, but it has no place when examining the teachings of God. This is because our emotions often lead us astray. It is not wise to always allow ourselves to be guided by feelings and emotions. That is a very slippery slope. For example, people often use feelings to justify premaritial sex (" But we really love each other") but that does not make it right.

I look forward to discussing this with you more. But like you, work and other responsibilities limit my time during the week.

Sincerely,

Maria1212
 
Protestant101 said:
I would also be interested to hear from Catholics, or from other Protestants on this board, what do you think of the following types of quotes, as in this one by Jonathan Edwards, taken from his sermon: “Sinners In The Hands Of An Angry God.”

I noticed that a poster above mentioned that they thought it made God very unjust if He really did “annihilate” people in the end, yet, I am one who has suffered severe burns over large tracts of my body, (mostly 3rd degree) and I know personally what it feels like to be literally fried to a crisp…I cannot imagine a God who would do such a thing to anyone for all of eternity! How does that make Him just?

I have more to say to other points above; but I will have to be away for a bit…🙂
Click to expand...
“I cannot imagine a God who…”

Well, you got that right. We cannot fathom God. We can only trust him.

The biggest danger I see in your emotional appeal is that once a person sets themselves up to judge whether or not God is just or compassionate, where does it stop? You don’t like the teaching that hell is eternal, because you can’t reconcile it with a loving God. Well, how about the Christian teaching that our eternal destination is decided now, in one short human lifetime, and is set for all eternity at death? Buddhists think that is rather unreasonable, as we all tend to make mistakes. Why not thousands of lifetimes and chances to get it right? Isn’t that more just? Why condemn anyone to hell in the first place, couldn’t God lower his standards? Why did Jesus have to die? Couldn’t a loving God figure out a better way to save us without all that messy business at the cross?

The suppositions just get further and further from Christianity. That is the danger of false teachings.

I know personally many Buddhists who were former Christians. They often start out rejecting hell. Then object to the idea of blood offerings for sin, then decide that Jesus’s death was too violent and unnecessary for Christianity to have any validity for them. Then they start embracing reincarnation, etc, as a more compassionate spiritual path. After all, Buddhists don’t even kill insects if they can avoid it, how much more loving and compassionate towards all living things than Christianity… And so the rationalizations continue until they are hardly Christian anymore even if they don’t outright reject Jesus. This isn’t supposition, I’ve been there myself.

How do you reconcile an eternal hell and a loving God? TRUST.

As I’ve pointed out, and others, the chief suffering of hell is seperation from God. God does not want us to suffer hell, we choose it by our own actions. The lurid descriptions of hell such as offered by your Calvinist preacher up above, are not doctrine but supposition. As a Catholic, I’m as appalled as you are by the tone of that 19th century sermon. Yet I believe that there is a hell and that it is eternal. Thats what the Bible teaches, thats what 20 centuries of Christian Tradition teaches. I know you don’t like that word, tradition, but it safeguards us against new ideas (like Adventism) that lead us away from the Truth given to us by the Apostles.

MarysRoses
 
I think it was Chesterson who said something to the effect of, “God is not nice, he is Just and merciful, but not nice.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top