Wednesday 19 November 2014

Why are there two different Creation accounts in Genesis chapters 1-2?

Question: "Why are there two different Creation accounts in Genesis chapters 1-2?"

Answer:
Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” Later, in Genesis 2:4, it seems that a second, different story of creation begins. The idea of two differing creation accounts is a common misinterpretation of these two passages which, in fact, describe the same creation event. They do not disagree as to the order in which things were created and do not contradict one another. Genesis 1 describes the “six days of creation” (and a seventh day of rest), Genesis 2 covers only one day of that creation week—the sixth day—and there is no contradiction.

In Genesis 2, the author steps back in the temporal sequence to the sixth day, when God made man. In the first chapter, the author of Genesis presents the creation of man on the sixth day as the culmination or high point of creation. Then, in the second chapter, the author gives greater detail regarding the creation of man.

There are two primary claims of contradictions between Genesis chapters 1-2. The first is in regard to plant life. Genesis 1:11 records God creating vegetation on the third day. Genesis 2:5 states that prior to the creation of man “no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no man to work the ground.” So, which is it? Did God create vegetation on the third day before He created man (Genesis 1), or after He created man (Genesis 2)? The Hebrew words for “vegetation” are different in the two passages. Genesis 1:11 uses a term that refers to vegetation in general. Genesis 2:5 uses a more specific term that refers to vegetation that requires agriculture, i.e., a person to tend it, a gardener. The passages do not contradict. Genesis 1:11 speaks of God creating vegetation, and Genesis 2:5 speaks of God not causing “farmable” vegetation to grow until after He created man.

The second claimed contradiction is in regard to animal life. Genesis 1:24-25 records God creating animal life on the sixth day, before He created man. Genesis 2:19, in some translations, seems to record God creating the animals after He had created man. However, a good and plausible translation of Genesis 2:19-20 reads, “Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them, and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.” The text does not say that God created man, then created the animals, and then brought the animals to the man. Rather, the text says, “Now the LORD God had [already] created all the animals.” There is no contradiction. On the sixth day, God created the animals, then created man, and then brought the animals to the man, allowing the man to name the animals.

By considering the two creation accounts individually and then reconciling them, we see that God describes the sequence of creation in Genesis 1, then clarifies its most important details, especially of the sixth day, in Genesis 2. There is no contradiction here, merely a common literary device describing an event from the general to the specific.

What is the age of the earth? How old is the earth?

Question: "What is the age of the earth? How old is the earth?"

Answer:
Given the fact that, according to the Bible, Adam was created on the sixth day of our planet’s existence, we can determine a biblically based, approximate age for the earth by looking at the chronological details of the human race. This assumes that the Genesis account is accurate, that the six days of creation were literal 24-hour periods, and that there were no ambiguous gaps in the chronology of Genesis.

The genealogies listed in Genesis chapters 5 and 11 provide the age at which Adam and his descendants each fathered the next generation in a successive ancestral line from Adam to Abraham. By determining where Abraham fits into history chronologically and adding up the ages provided in Genesis 5 and 11, it becomes apparent that the Bible teaches the earth to be about 6000 years old, give or take a few hundred years.

What about the billions of years accepted by most scientists today and taught in the vast majority of our academic institutions? This age is primarily derived from two dating techniques: radiometric dating and the geologic timescale. Scientists who advocate the younger age of about 6000 years insist that radiometric dating is flawed in that it is founded upon a series of faulty assumptions, while the geologic timescale is flawed in that it employs circular reasoning. Moreover, they point to the debunking of old-earth myths, like the popular misconception that it takes long periods of time for stratification, fossilization and the formation of diamonds, coal, oil, stalactites, stalagmites, etc, to occur. Finally, young-earth advocates present positive evidence for a young age for the earth in place of the old-earth evidences which they debunk. Young-earth scientists acknowledge that they are in the minority today but insist that their ranks will swell over time as more and more scientists reexamine the evidence and take a closer look at the currently accepted old-earth paradigm.

Ultimately, the age of the earth cannot be proven. Whether 6000 years or billions of years, both viewpoints (and everything in between) rest on faith and assumptions. Those who hold to billions of years trust that methods such as radiometric dating are reliable and that nothing has occurred in history that may have disrupted the normal decay of radio-isotopes. Those who hold to 6000 years trust that the Bible is true and that other factors explain the “apparent” age of the earth, such as the global flood, or God’s creating the universe in a state that “appears” to give it a very long age. As an example, God created Adam and Eve as fully-grown adult human beings. If a doctor had examined Adam and Eve on the day of their creation, the doctor would have estimated their age at 20 years (or whatever age they appeared to be) when, in fact, Adam and Eve were less than one day old. Whatever the case, there is always good reason to trust the Word of God over the words of atheistic scientists with an evolutionary agenda.

What is the God particle?


Question: "What is the God particle?"

Answer:
The "God particle" is the nickname of a subatomic particle called the Higgs boson. In layman’s terms, different subatomic particles are responsible for giving matter different properties. One of the most mysterious and important properties is mass. Some particles, like protons and neutrons, have mass. Others, like photons, do not. The Higgs boson, or “God particle,” is believed to be the particle which gives mass to matter. The “God particle” nickname grew out of the long, drawn-out struggles of physicists to find this elusive piece of the cosmic puzzle. What follows is a very brief, very simplified explanation of how the Higgs boson fits into modern physics, and how science is attempting to study it.

The “standard model” of particle physics is a system that attempts to describe the forces, components, and reactions of the basic particles that make up matter. It not only deals with atoms and their components, but the pieces that compose some subatomic particles. This model does have some major gaps, including gravity, and some experimental contradictions. The standard model is still a very good method of understanding particle physics, and it continues to improve. The model predicts that there are certain elementary particles even smaller than protons and neutrons. As of the date of this writing, the only particle predicted by the model which has not been experimentally verified is the “Higgs boson,” jokingly referred to as the “God particle.”

Each of the subatomic particles contributes to the forces that cause all matter interactions. One of the most important, but least understood, aspects of matter is mass. Science is not entirely sure why some particles seem mass-less, like photons, and others are “massive.” The standard model predicts that there is an elementary particle, the Higgs boson, which would produce the effect of mass. Confirmation of the Higgs boson would be a major milestone in our understanding of physics.

The “God particle” nickname actually arose when the book The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question? by Leon Lederman was published. Since then, it’s taken on a life of its own, in part because of the monumental questions about matter that the God particle might be able to answer. The man who first proposed the Higgs boson’s existence, Peter Higgs, isn’t all that amused by the nickname “God particle,” as he’s an avowed atheist. All the same, there isn’t really any religious intention behind the nickname.

Currently, efforts are under way to confirm the Higgs boson using the Large Hadron Collider, a particle accelerator in Switzerland, which should be able to confirm or refute the existence of the God particle. As with any scientific discovery, God’s amazing creation becomes more and more impressive as we learn more about it. Either result—that the Higgs boson exists, or does not exist—represents a step forward in human knowledge and another step forward in our appreciation of God’s awe-inspiring universe. Whether or not there is a “God particle,” we know this about Christ: “For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible . . . all things were created by him and for him” (Colossians 1:16).

Do faith in God and science contradict?

 Question: "Do faith in God and science contradict?"


Answer:
Science is defined as “the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.” Science is a method that mankind can use to gain a greater understanding of the natural universe. It is a search for knowledge through observation. Advances in science demonstrate the reach of human logic and imagination. However, a Christian’s belief in science should never be like our belief in God. A Christian can have faith in God and respect for science, as long as we remember which is perfect and which is not.

Our belief in God is a belief of faith. We have faith in His Son for salvation, faith in His Word for instruction, and faith in His Holy Spirit for guidance. Our faith in God should be absolute, since when we put our faith in God, we depend on a perfect, omnipotent, omniscient Creator. Our belief in science should be intellectual and nothing more. We can count on science to do many great things, but we can also count on science to make mistakes. If we put faith in science, we depend on imperfect, sinful, limited, mortal men. Science throughout history has been wrong about many things, such as the shape of the earth, powered flight, vaccines, blood transfusions, and even reproduction. God is never wrong.

Truth is nothing to fear, so there is no reason for a Christian to fear good science. Learning more about the way God constructed our universe helps all of mankind appreciate the wonder of creation. Expanding our knowledge helps us to combat disease, ignorance, and misunderstanding. However, there is danger when scientists hold their faith in human logic above faith in our Creator. These persons are no different from anyone devoted to a religion; they have chosen faith in man and will find facts to defend that faith.

Still, the most rational scientists, even those who refuse to believe in God, admit to a lack of completeness in our understanding of the universe. They will admit that neither God nor the Bible can be proved or disproved by science, just as many of their favorite theories ultimately cannot be proved or disproved. Science is meant to be a truly neutral discipline, seeking only the truth, not furtherance of an agenda.

Much of science supports the existence and work of God. Psalm 19:1 says, “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of His hands.” As modern science discovers more about the universe, we find more evidence of creation. The amazing complexity and replication of DNA, the intricate and interlocking laws of physics, and the absolute harmony of conditions and chemistry here on earth all serve to support the message of the Bible. A Christian should embrace science that seeks the truth, but reject the “priests of science” who put human knowledge above God.

Question: "Can a Christian lose salvation?



Answer:
Before this question is answered, the term “Christian” must be defined. A “Christian” is not a person who has said a prayer, or walked down an aisle, or been raised in a Christian family. While each of these things can be a part of the Christian experience, they are not what “makes” a Christian. A Christian is a person who has, by faith, received and fully trusted in Jesus Christ as the only Savior (John 3:16; Acts 16:31; Ephesians 2:8-9).

So, with this definition in mind, can a Christian lose salvation? Perhaps the best way to answer this crucially important question is to examine what the Bible says occurs at salvation, and to study what losing salvation would therefore entail. Here are a few examples:

A Christian is a new creation. “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!” (2 Corinthians 5:17). This verse speaks of a person becoming an entirely new creature as a result of being “in Christ.” For a Christian to lose salvation, the new creation would have to be canceled and reversed.

A Christian is redeemed. “For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect” (1 Peter 1:18-19). The word “redeemed” refers to a purchase being made, a price being paid. For a Christian to lose salvation, God Himself would have to revoke His purchase that He paid for with the precious blood of Christ.

A Christian is justified. “Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (Romans 5:1). To “justify” means to “declare righteous.” All those who receive Jesus as Savior are “declared righteous” by God. For a Christian to lose salvation, God would have to go back on His Word and “un-declare” what He had previously declared.

A Christian is promised eternal life. “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16). Eternal life is a promise of eternity (forever) in heaven with God. God promises, “Believe and you will have eternal life.” For a Christian to lose salvation, eternal life would have to be taken away. If a Christian is promised to live forever, how then can God break this promise by taking away eternal life?

A Christian is guaranteed glorification. “And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Romans 8:30). As we learned in Romans 5:1, justification is declared at the moment of faith. According to Romans 8:30, glorification is guaranteed for all those whom God justifies. Glorification refers to a Christian receiving a perfect resurrection body in heaven. If a Christian can lose salvation, then Romans 8:30 is in error, because God could not guarantee glorification for all those whom He predestines, calls, and justifies.

Many more illustrations of what occurs at salvation could be shared. Even these few make it abundantly clear that a Christian cannot lose salvation. Most, if not all, of what the Bible says happens to us when we receive Jesus Christ as Savior would be invalidated if salvation could be lost. Salvation cannot be reversed. A Christian cannot be un-newly created. Redemption cannot be undone. Eternal life cannot be lost and still be considered eternal. If a Christian can lose salvation, God would have to go back on His Word and change His mind—two things that Scripture tells us God never does.

The most frequent objections to the belief that a Christian cannot lose salvation are 1) What about those who are Christians and continually live an immoral lifestyle? 2) What about those who are Christians but later reject the faith and deny Christ? The problem with these two objections is the phrase “who are Christians.” The Bible declares that a true Christian will not live a continually immoral lifestyle (1 John 3:6). The Bible declares that anyone who departs the faith is demonstrating that he never truly was a Christian (1 John 2:19). Therefore, neither objection is valid. Christians do not continually live immoral lifestyles, nor do they reject the faith and deny Christ. Such actions are proof that they were never redeemed.

No, a Christian cannot lose salvation. Nothing can separate a Christian from God’s love (Romans 8:38-39). Nothing can remove a Christian from God’s hand (John 10:28-29). God is both willing and able to guarantee and maintain the salvation He has given us. Jude 24-25, “To Him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy—to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.”


Once saved always saved?

Question: "Once saved always saved?"

Answer:
Once a person is saved are they always saved? When people come to know Christ as their Savior, they are brought into a relationship with God that guarantees their salvation as eternally secure. Numerous passages of Scripture declare this fact.

(a) Romans 8:30 declares, "And those He predestined, He also called; those He called, He also justified; those He justified, He also glorified." This verse tells us that from the moment God chooses us, it is as if we are glorified in His presence in heaven. There is nothing that can prevent a believer from one day being glorified because God has already purposed it in heaven. Once a person is justified, his salvation is guaranteed - he is as secure as if he is already glorified in heaven.

(b) Paul asks two crucial questions in Romans 8:33-34 "Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died more than that, who was raised to life - is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us." Who will bring a charge against God's elect? No one will, because Christ is our advocate. Who will condemn us? No one will, because Christ, the One who died for us, is the one who condemns. We have both the advocate and judge as our Savior.

(c) Believers are born again (regenerated) when they believe (John 3:3; Titus 3:5). For a Christian to lose his salvation, he would have to be un-regenerated. The Bible gives no evidence that the new birth can be taken away.

(d) The Holy Spirit indwells all believers (John 14:17; Romans 8:9) and baptizes all believers into the Body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13). For a believer to become unsaved, he would have to be "un-indwelt" and detached from the Body of Christ.

(e) John 3:15 states that whoever believes in Jesus Christ will "have eternal life." If you believe in Christ today and have eternal life, but lose it tomorrow, then it was never "eternal" at all. Hence if you lose your salvation, the promises of eternal life in the Bible would be in error.

(f) For the most conclusive argument, Scripture says it best itself, "For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 8:38-39). Remember the same God who saved you is the same God who will keep you. Once we are saved we are always saved. Our salvation is most definitely eternally secure!

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/once-saved-always-saved.html#ixzz3JaHhUWyS

What does the Bible say about tattoos / body piercings?

Question: "What does the Bible say about tattoos / body piercings?"

Answer:
The Old Testament law commanded the Israelites, “Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves. I am the LORD” (Leviticus 19:28). So, even though believers today are not under the Old Testament law (Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:23-25; Ephesians 2:15), the fact that there was a command against tattoos should raise some questions. The New Testament does not say anything about whether or not a believer should get a tattoo.

In relation to tattoos and body piercings, a good test is to determine whether we can honestly, in good conscience, ask God to bless and use that particular activity for His own good purposes. “So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God” (1 Corinthians 10:31). The New Testament does not command against tattoos or body piercings, but it also does not give us any reason to believe God would have us get tattoos or body piercings.

An important scriptural principle on issues the Bible does not specifically address is if there is room for doubt whether it pleases God, then it is best not to engage in that activity. Romans 14:23 reminds us that anything that does not come from faith is sin. We need to remember that our bodies, as well as our souls, have been redeemed and belong to God. Although 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 does not directly apply to tattoos or body piercings, it does give us a principle: “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body.” This great truth should have a real bearing on what we do and where we go with our bodies. If our bodies belong to God, we should make sure we have His clear “permission” before we “mark them up” with tattoos or body piercings.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/tattoos-sin.html#ixzz3JaGGPUy6

What are the responsibilities of deacons in the church?

 

Question: "What are the responsibilities of deacons in the church?"

Answer:
In the New Testament, the word usually translated "serve" is the Greek word diakoneo, which literally means "through the dirt." It refers to an attendant, a waiter, or one who ministers to another. From this word we get the English word “deacon.” We first see the word "deacon" used this way in the book of Acts. “And the twelve summoned the full number of the disciples and said, "It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables” (Acts 6:2). The men who were giving themselves to feeding the flock by preaching and teaching realized that it wasn’t right for them to leave those activities to wait tables, so they found some other men who were willing to serve, and put them in place to minister to the church’s physical needs while the elders or pastors ministered to their spiritual needs. It was a better use of the resources they were given, and a better use of everyone’s gifts. It also got more people involved in serving and helping one another.

Today, for the biblical church, these roles are essentially the same. Elders and pastors are to “preach the word…reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching” (2 Timothy 4:2), and deacons are to be appointed to take care of everything else. In a modern church, this might include taking on administrative or organizational tasks, ushering, being responsible for building maintenance, or volunteering to be the church treasurer. It depends on the need and the gifts of the available men.

The responsibilities of a deacon are not clearly listed or outlined; they are assumed to be everything that does not include the duties of an elder or pastor, which is to preach, teach, and exhort. But qualifications for a deacon’s character are clearly outlined in Scripture. They are to be blameless, the husband of one wife, a good household manager, respectable, honest, not addicted to alcohol and not greedy (1 Timothy 3:8-12). According to the Word, the office of deacon is an honor and a blessing. “For those who serve well as deacons gain a good standing for themselves and also great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 3:13).

Is a man who divorced and remarried before coming to Christ eligible to pastor a church?

 
Question: "Is a man who divorced and remarried before coming to Christ eligible to pastor a church?"

Answer:
The issue of divorced people serving in the ministry (especially the pastorate) is a topic of some deliberation today. We know that divorce is a sin, but we also know that God forgives sin. Making the issue more complex is the consideration of the timing of the divorce. What if the divorce occurred before the person was even saved? Does God hold us accountable for the decisions we made in our “before Christ” life? Should the mistakes made pre-conversion have any bearing on one’s current ministry opportunities?

First, let’s look at what Scripture says about the qualifications for an elder/pastor, found in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1. Right away, we see that a pastor is to be “the husband of one wife” (1 Timothy 3:3, ESV). Some consider that this means a pastor cannot be divorced and remarried. Others interpret it to mean that pastors cannot be single (they must be married), they cannot be widowed and remarried, or they cannot be polygamists. However, none of these interpretations are necessarily what Paul meant.

We gain some insight by considering the original Greek phrase, which can be literally translated as “a one-woman man.” Paul’s emphasis is on the moral integrity of the pastor, not necessarily his current marital status. Being a “one-woman man” is being committed to one’s wife. The NIV translation brings out the meaning a little more clearly: “faithful to his wife.”

Of course, depending on the reason for the divorce, a divorced man might not have always been “faithful to his wife”; he may have been unfaithful at one time. Neither would he have kept the command to “manage his own family well” (1 Timothy 3:4)—again, depending on the reason for the divorce.

However, the question remains, does a divorce in the past—even one caused by adultery—permanently disqualify a man from the office of pastor? Knowing the grace and mercy of God, we would answer that with a qualified “no.” God’s forgiveness is real, and His cleansing from sin is complete (1 John 1:9). It is quite possible for a man to have gone through a divorce years ago, repent of his sin, learn from his mistakes, remarry, and now be a fully committed, “one-woman man.” This is not to say a man can divorce his wife one week, marry his lover the next, and take a pastorate the week after that. No, the office of pastor is not for those exhibiting moral laxity. There must be an established pattern of faithfulness and of managing his household well in order to be qualified. Any divorce in his past should be long forgotten, overshadowed by more recent history.

Based on this principle, we would say that a man who divorced before he was saved should not be disqualified for the pastorate—given that he meets the other requirements listed in 1 Timothy 3 (including that he “not be a recent convert,” verse 6) and that his walk with the Lord includes ample evidence of having a solid marriage. He must be a “one-woman man” now.

Praise the Lord, when we are saved, the old life is dead and gone. As Romans 6:4 says, “We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life” (see also 2 Corinthians 5:17). Whatever sins we committed before we were saved, we are forgiven, we are freed, we are made new.

What does the "husband of one wife" phrase in 1 Timothy 3:2 mean? Can a divorced man serve as a pastor, elder, or deacon?


Question: "What does the "husband of one wife" phrase in 1 Timothy 3:2 mean? Can a divorced man serve as a pastor, elder, or deacon?"

Answer:
There are at least three possible interpretations of the phrase “husband of one wife” in 1 Timothy 3:2. 1) It could simply be saying that a polygamist is not qualified to be an elder, a deacon or a pastor. This is the most literal interpretation of the phrase, but seems somewhat unlikely considering that polygamy was quite rare in the time that Paul was writing. 2) The phrase could also be translated “one-woman man.” This would indicate that a bishop must be absolutely loyal to the woman he is married to. This interpretation focuses more on moral purity than marital status. 3) The phrase could also be understood to declare that in order to be an elder/deacon/pastor, a man can only have been married once, other than in the case of a remarried widower.

Interpretations 2) and 3) are the most prevalent today. Interpretation 2) seems to be the strongest, primarily because Scripture seems to allow for divorce in exceptional circumstances (Matthew 19:9; 1 Corinthians 7:12-16). It would also be important to differentiate between a man who was divorced and remarried before he became a Christian from a man who was divorced and remarried after becoming a Christian. An otherwise qualified man should not be excluded from church leadership because of actions he took prior to coming to know the Lord Jesus Christ as his Savior. Although 1 Timothy 3:2 does not necessarily exclude a divorced or remarried man from serving as an elder/deacon/pastor, there are other issues to consider.

The first qualification of an elder/deacon/pastor is to be “above reproach” (1 Timothy 3:2). If the divorce and/or remarriage results in a poor testimony for the man in the church or community, it may be the “above reproach” qualification that excludes him rather than the “husband of one wife” requirement. An elder/deacon/pastor is to be a man that the church and community can look up to as an example of Christ-likeness and godly leadership. If his divorce and/or remarriage situation detracts from this purpose, perhaps he should not serve in the position of elder/deacon/pastor. It is important to remember, though, that just because a man is disqualified from serving as an elder/deacon/pastor, he is still a valuable member of the body of Christ. Every Christian possesses spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12:4-7) and is called to participate in edifying other believers with those gifts (1 Corinthians 12:7). A man who is disqualified from the position of elder/deacon/pastor can still teach, preach, serve, pray, worship, and play an important role in the church.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/husband-one-wife.html#ixzz3JZmeFsE5

Question: "What roles can women fill in ministry?


What roles can women fill in ministry?


Answer: Women in ministry is an issue upon which Bible-believing Christians can and do disagree. The point of separation centers on the passages of Scripture that forbid women to speak in church or "assume authority over a man" (1 Timothy 2:12; cf. 1 Corinthians 14:34). The disagreement is whether or not those passages were relevant only to the era in which they were penned. Some contend that, since there is neither “Jew nor Greek . . . male nor female . . . but you are all one in Christ” (Galatians 3:28), women are free to pursue any field of ministry open to men. Others hold that 1 Timothy 2:12 still applies today, since the basis for the command is not cultural but universal, being rooted in the order of creation (1 Timothy 2:13-14).

First Peter 5:1-4 details the qualifications for an elder. Presbuteros is the Greek word used sixty-six times in the New Testament to indicate “seasoned male overseer.” It is the masculine form of the word. The feminine form, presbutera, is never used in reference to elders or shepherds. Based on the qualifications found in 1 Timothy 3:1-7, the role of an elder is interchangeable with the bishop/pastor/overseer (Titus 1:6-9; 1 Peter 5:1-3). And since, according to 1 Timothy 2:12, a woman should not “teach or exercise authority over a man,” it seems clear that the position of elders and pastors—who must be equipped to teach, lead the congregation, and oversee their spiritual growth (1 Timothy 3:2)—should be reserved for men only.

However, elder/bishop/pastor appears to be the only office reserved for men. Women have always played a significant role in the growth of the church, even being among the few who witnessed the crucifixion of Christ when most of the disciples had run away (Matthew 27:55; John 19:25). The apostle Paul held women in high regard, and in many of his letters to the churches he greeted specific women by name (Romans 16:6, 12; Colossians 4:15; Philippians 4:2-3; Philemon 1:2). Paul addresses these women as "co-workers," and they clearly served the Lord to the benefit of the whole church (Philippians 4:3; Colossians 4:15).

Offices were created in the early church to fit the needs of the body. Although many modern churches interchange the positions of elder and deacon, they were not the same office. Deacons were appointed to serve in a physical capacity as the need arose (Acts 6:2-3). There is no clear prohibition against women serving in this way. In fact, Romans 16:1 may indicate that a woman named Phoebe was a respected deaconess in the church at Rome.

There is no scriptural precedent that forbids women from also serving as worship leaders, youth ministers, or children’s directors. The only restriction is that they do not assume a role of spiritual authority over adult men. Since the concern in Scripture appears to be the issue of spiritual authority rather than function, any role that does not bestow such spiritual authority over adult men is permissible.

About Women pastors | Can a woman be a pastor or preacher?

Question: "Women pastors / preachers? Can a woman be a pastor or preacher?"

Answer:
There is perhaps no more hotly debated issue in the church today than the issue of women serving as pastors/preachers. As a result, it is very important to not see this issue as men versus women. There are women who believe women should not serve as pastors and that the Bible places restrictions on the ministry of women, and there are men who believe women can serve as preachers and that there are no restrictions on women in ministry. This is not an issue of chauvinism or discrimination. It is an issue of biblical interpretation.

The Word of God proclaims, “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent” (1 Timothy 2:11–12). In the church, God assigns different roles to men and women. This is a result of the way mankind was created and the way in which sin entered the world (1 Timothy 2:13–14). God, through the apostle Paul, restricts women from serving in roles of teaching and/or having spiritual authority over men. This precludes women from serving as pastors over men, which definitely includes preaching to them, teaching them publicly, and exercising spiritual authority over them.

There are many objections to this view of women in pastoral ministry. A common one is that Paul restricts women from teaching because in the first century, women were typically uneducated. However, 1 Timothy 2:11–14 nowhere mentions educational status. If education were a qualification for ministry, then the majority of Jesus’ disciples would not have been qualified. A second common objection is that Paul only restricted the women of Ephesus from teaching men (1 Timothy was written to Timothy, the pastor of the church in Ephesus). Ephesus was known for its temple to Artemis, and women were the authorities in that branch of paganism—therefore, the theory goes, Paul was only reacting against the female-led customs of the Ephesian idolaters, and the church needed to be different. However, the book of 1 Timothy nowhere mentions Artemis, nor does Paul mention the standard practice of Artemis worshipers as a reason for the restrictions in 1 Timothy 2:11–12.

A third objection is that Paul is only referring to husbands and wives, not men and women in general. The Greek words for “woman” and “man” in 1 Timothy 2 could refer to husbands and wives; however, the basic meaning of the words is broader than that. Further, the same Greek words are used in verses 8–10. Are only husbands to lift up holy hands in prayer without anger and disputing (verse 8)? Are only wives to dress modestly, have good deeds, and worship God (verses 9–10)? Of course not. Verses 8–10 clearly refer to all men and women, not just husbands and wives. There is nothing in the context that would indicate a narrowing to husbands and wives in verses 11–14.

Yet another objection to this interpretation of women in pastoral ministry is in relation to women who held positions of leadership in the Bible, specifically Miriam, Deborah, and Huldah in the Old Testament. It is true that these women where chosen by God for special service to Him and that they stand as models of faith, courage, and, yes, leadership. However, the authority of women in the Old Testament is not relevant to the issue of pastors in the church. The New Testament Epistles present a new paradigm for God’s people—the church, the body of Christ—and that paradigm involves an authority structure unique to the church, not for the nation of Israel or any other Old Testament entity.

Similar arguments are made using Priscilla and Phoebe in the New Testament. In Acts 18, Priscilla and Aquila are presented as faithful ministers for Christ. Priscilla’s name is mentioned first, perhaps indicating that she was more prominent in ministry than her husband. Did Priscilla and her husband teach the gospel of Jesus Christ to Apollos? Yes, in their home they “explained to him the way of God more adequately” (Acts 18:26). Does the Bible ever say that Priscilla pastored a church or taught publicly or became the spiritual leader of a congregation of saints? No. As far as we know, Priscilla was not involved in ministry activity in contradiction to 1 Timothy 2:11–14.

In Romans 16:1, Phoebe is called a “deacon” (or “servant”) in the church and is highly commended by Paul. But, as with Priscilla, there is nothing in Scripture to indicate that Phoebe was a pastor or a teacher of men in the church. “Able to teach” is given as a qualification for elders, but not for deacons (1 Timothy 3:1–13; Titus 1:6–9).

The structure of 1 Timothy 2:11–14 makes the reason why women cannot be pastors perfectly clear. Verse 13 begins with “for,” giving the “cause” of Paul’s statement in verses 11–12. Why should women not teach or have authority over men? Because “Adam was created first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived” (verses 13–14). God created Adam first and then created Eve to be a “helper” for Adam. The order of creation has universal application in the family (Ephesians 5:22–33) and in the church.

The fact that Eve was deceived is also given in 1 Timothy 2:14 as a reason for women not serving as pastors or having spiritual authority over men. This does not mean that women are gullible or that they are all more easily deceived than men. If all women are more easily deceived, why would they be allowed to teach children (who are easily deceived) and other women (who are supposedly more easily deceived)? The text simply says that women are not to teach men or have spiritual authority over men because Eve was deceived. God has chosen to give men the primary teaching authority in the church.

Many women excel in gifts of hospitality, mercy, teaching, evangelism, and helps. Much of the ministry of the local church depends on women. Women in the church are not restricted from public praying or prophesying (1 Corinthians 11:5), only from having spiritual teaching authority over men. The Bible nowhere restricts women from exercising the gifts of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12). Women, just as much as men, are called to minister to others, to demonstrate the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22–23), and to proclaim the gospel to the lost (Matthew 28:18–20; Acts 1:8; 1 Peter 3:15).

God has ordained that only men are to serve in positions of spiritual teaching authority in the church. This is not because men are necessarily better teachers or because women are inferior or less intelligent (which is not the case). It is simply the way God designed the church to function. Men are to set the example in spiritual leadership—in their lives and through their words. Women are to take a less authoritative role. Women are encouraged to teach other women (Titus 2:3–5). The Bible also does not restrict women from teaching children. The only activity women are restricted from is teaching or having spiritual authority over men. This precludes women from serving as pastors to men. This does not make women less important, by any means, but rather gives them a ministry focus more in agreement with God’s plan and His gifting of them.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/women-pastors.html#ixzz3JZ8MjnIk

What is Everlasting Destruction in the Bible

Here we shall look at prominent biblical examples of literal everlasting destruction that back-up the numerous passages which blatantly state that unrighteous people will be destroyed in the lake of fire and not suffer never-ending roasting torment, such as Matthew 10:28, 2 Thessalonians 1:9 and 2 Peter 3:7.


The Example of Gehenna: “Hell”

 Let’s start with the very word “hell” itself. There is only one biblical word translated as “hell” which refers to the lake of fire and is therefore relevant to the final disposition of ungodly people: Gehenna (GEH-en-nah). Gehenna is the Greek form of the Hebrew Ge-Hinnom, which literally means “the Valley of Hinnom.” The Hinnom Valley, also referred to as Topheth (TOH-feth), which means “a place to be spat on or abhorred,” borders Jerusalem to the south and can easily be located on close-up Bible maps of Jerusalem. It is to this valley that Jesus was referring to when he said, “…be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell (Gehenna).” Why would Jesus use this ravine located outside the walls of Jerusalem as an example of the lake of fire and the destruction that will take place there on Judgment day?
hell12
To answer, let me briefly inform you about Gehenna’s history: The worst of Judah’s kings practiced pagan worship in the Hinnom Valley, with child sacrifice being a particularly offensive aspect of this “worship” (2 Kings 16:3; 21:6). The valley apparently became a fiery disposal dump for 185,000 Assyrian warriors slain by the LORD (see 2 Kings 19:35; Isaiah 30:33 & 37:36), and, later, it would overflow with Israelite corpses as well when God judged Judah for its sins. Consequently Gehenna became known as “the Valley of Slaughter” (Jeremiah 7:30-34 & 19:2-13). Note incidentally that Gehenna was known as “the Valley of Slaughter” and not “the Valley of Eternal Conscious Suffering,” an important difference.
Needless to say, long before Jesus’ earthly ministry Gehenna had a negative image of sinful rebellion, fire and death.
After righteous King Josiah desecrated Gehenna as part of his godly reforms (2 King 23:10), the valley became the perpetually smoking trash dump of Jerusalem, which it was at the time of Christ. As a hygienic incinerator, Gehenna’s fires were kept constantly burning in order to burn up the refuse thrown in — trash, garbage, animal carcasses, corpses of despised criminals and vanquished enemies. As would be natural in such a climate, worms or maggots bred freely and preyed upon the filth, so whatever was not burned up in the fires would be devoured by maggots.
James Tabor, a professor of religious studies, commented about Gehenna on A&E’s Mysteries of the Bible segment “Heaven and Hell”:
“I’ve been to hell, many times I’ve been there and walked through it. It’s a valley on the south side of Jerusalem that anciently was a despicable place of child sacrifice; it’s mentioned in the Hebrew Bible a number of times. In Jesus’ day it was a garbage dump and so the fire was always burning and the maggots working and dead animals were thrown in there. Today you walk out the Dung Gate and look down in the Valley of Hinnom — that’s hell.” 
It was this garbage dump that Jesus referred to as an example of the lake of fire where God will “destroy both soul and body” (Matthew 10:28). The question must be asked: Why did Jesus feel Gehenna would be a good example of the second death? Because Gehenna was a very certain symbol of destruction which all of his hearers readily understood. We saw in Chapter One how supporters of eternal torture argue that “destroy” only refers to a ruined condition but this does not fit Jesus’ usage of Gehenna as an example of the second death. Why? Because every cell of every body thrown into Gehenna was either burned up in fire or digested by worms; a body could not be destroyed anymore completely.
The implication of Gehenna is clear: those who reject God’s love in Christ will ultimately become God’s garbage, and hence will be disposed of in God’s incinerating “garbage dump,” the lake of fire.
We cannot properly understand Christ’s teaching about the lake of fire and eternal punishment without keeping in mind this picture of Gehenna. Refuse was thrown into Gehenna for the purpose of disposal and eradication; it was therefore a perfect choice for Jesus to use as an example of the second death.
These facts make it obvious that it’s not really a good practice to translate Gehenna as “hell” in English Bibles. The reason being is that the word ‘hell’ typically conjures up images based more on medieval mythology (e.g. Dante’s Inferno) than on biblical fact. The common image ‘hell’ provokes is that of people eternally roasting in fire pits while devils poke them with pitchforks. It’s very comic booky. By comparison, the biblical image of Gehenna is quite different: the Valley of Hinnom conjures up the image of ultimate disposal and utter eradication. It would therefore be more accurate and informative to translate Gehenna as “the Valley of Hinnom” in biblical texts, even though it’s a symbolic reference to the lake of fire and the second death. For example, Matthew 10:28 should literally read: “ ‘Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One [God] who can destroy both soul and body in the Valley of Hinnom.’ ”
When this is done we get the proper impression of disposal and eradication rather than that of never-ending fiery torture in a devil-ruled nether realm. Disposal and erradication is the impression Jesus endeavored to give.


The Examples of Weeds, Trees, Branches and ChaffBurned Up in Fire


Jesus also used many examples of literal everlasting destruction in his parables to further back-up his words and to clearly illustrate that God would indeed ultimately destroy the ungodly in the lake of fire.
We should take these parables seriously because the Bible says that Jesus spoke in parables to reveal “things hidden since the creation of the world” (Matthew 13:35). Jesus used parables as an easy-to-understand way to reveal scriptural truths to the common people. In many of these parables natural things were used symbolically in order to explain principles of truth. For instance, the “ground” in The Parable of the Sower (Luke 8:1-15) represents a person’s heart and the “seed” represents the word of God.
Let’s observe a clear example of everlasting destruction contained in The Parable of the Weeds (or “Tares” in the KJV):
MATTHEW 13:24-30
Jesus told them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed seed in his field. (25) But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. (26) When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared. (27) The owner’s servants came to him and said, ‘Sir, didn’t you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?’ (28) ‘An enemy did this,’ he replied. The servants asked him, ‘do you want us to go and pull them up?’ (29) ‘No,’ he answered, ‘because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. (30) Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.’ ”
In verses 37-39 Jesus explains the symbolism of this parable: The owner of the field who sowed the good seed is Jesus, the “field” is the world, the “wheat” is the righteous, the “weeds” are ungodly people and the “enemy” who sowed them is the devil, the “harvest” is the end of the age, and the “harvesters” are angels. After explaining this symbolism, Jesus states:
MATTHEW 13:40
As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so will it be at the end of the age.”
Jesus is saying that just as weeds are burned in the fire in his story, so it will be with ungodly people — God’s enemies — at the end of this age on judgment day.
When literal weeds are burned, they are burned up. Was Jesus using a wrong example here or did he mean what he said? The obvious answer is that Jesus meant exactly what he said. When the ungodly are thrown into the lake of fire, they — like the weeds — will be burned up.
jesus-resurrectionThe above example of weeds is backed up by three similar examples used in the gospels. In Matthew 7:19 Jesus likened the ungodly to trees: “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.” In John 15:6 he likened those who reject him to branches: “If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned.” Similarly, in Luke 3:17 John the Baptist likened evildoers to chaff: “His (Jesus’) winnowing fork is in his hand to clear his threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his barn, but he will BURN UP the chaff with unquenchable fire.”
In all these cases, the “trees,” “branches” and “chaff” represent ungodly people – God’s enemies; and each of these combustible articles are to be “thrown (discarded) into the fire and burned.” Luke 3:17 even specifies that they will be “burned up.”
As is the case with the Parable of the Weeds above, the “fire” in all these examples is, of course, a reference to the lake of fire. When the ungodly are thrown into the lake of fire, they — like the trees, branches and chaff — will be burned up.
As you can see, Jesus makes the issue of human damnation so simple and clear that even a child can understand it. 


“Like Green Plants They Will Soon Die Away”


Let’s look at some similar examples of literal everlasting destruction used elsewhere in Scripture:
PSALM 37:1-2
Do not fret because of evil men or be envious of those who do wrong; (2) for like the grass they will soon wither, like green plants they will soon die away.
Notice how evil people are likened to grass that will soon wither and to green plants that will soon die away.
Adherents of eternal torment would contend that this text is referring to physical death in the here in now (the first death) and not to eternal death (the second death), but verses 9-13 refute this argument:
PSALM 37:9-13
For evil men will be cut off, but those who hope in the LORD will inherit the land. (10) A little while and the wicked will be no more; though you look for them, they will not be found. (11) But the meek will inherit the land and enjoy great peace. (12) The wicked plot against the righteous and gnash their teeth at them; (13) but the LORD laughs at the wicked for he knows their day is coming.
These verses prove that this is an eschatological passage — a text dealing with the ultimate fate of humankind and the world. Note how verse 9 refers to a time when evil people will ultimately be cut off, but “those who hope in the LORD” will inherit the land. Verse 11 further emphasizes that the meek will inherit the land and verse 29 adds an important detail, stating that “the righteous will inherit the land and dwell in it forever.” These two verses coincide with Jesus’ statement in Matthew 5:5 regarding how “the meek shall inherit the earth.” Jesus was of course referring to the new earth spoken of in Revelation 21:1-4.
Biblically, we know that all evil people will not be cut off until “the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men” (2 Peter 3:7Revelation 20:11-15) and that the meek or righteous will not inherit the earth forever until the new earth, the home of righteousness, is revealed (2 Peter 3:13).
Furthermore, observe verses 10 and 13: “A little while and the wicked will be no more… but the LORD laughs at the wicked for he knows their day is coming.” Verse 10 refers to a time when all the wicked will be “no more” and the Bible clearly reveals that the only time this will become a reality is, once again, “the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.” This is why, according to verse 13, the LORD laughs at the wicked because “he knows their day is coming.” What day? Why, the day of judgment, of course!


“They Will VanishVanish Like Smoke”


With the understanding that Psalm 37 contains eschatological references, let’s observe verse 20:
PSALM 37:20
But the wicked will perish: The LORD’s enemies will be like the beauty of the fields, they will vanishvanish like smoke.
Note the explicit proclamation that “the wicked will perish.” It doesn’t say that the wicked will be consciously tormented in fire forever and ever, but that they will perish. The rest of the verse gives a natural illustration so that we may perfectly understand this perishment of the wicked: it likens God’s enemies to “the beauty of the fields” that will be burned up. According to this unmistakable example what will be the ultimate end of God’s enemies? It says “they will vanishvanish like smoke.” Once again, I have to ask, how much clearer could the Scriptures possibly be? The LORD’s enemies will not perpetually exist in fiery conscious torment, they’re going to be utterly consumed by fire and go up in smoke.
A similar illustration is used in the New Testament:
HEBREWS 6:7-8
Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. (8) But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.
The “land” in verse 8, which is worthless and produces nothing but thorns and thistles, is a figurative reference to worthless Christians who profess to know Christ but bear no fruit (see verses 4-6 for verification). The land that produces a useful crop in verse 7 is an obvious reference to fruit-bearing, faithful Christians; such productive “land” will receive the blessings of God. But notice what will ultimately happen to the worthless land that produces thorns and thistles: “In the end it will be burned.”
This example perfectly coincides with Jesus’ two examples above: every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire; every branch that bears no fruit is cut off the vine and thrown into the fire. Likewise, the worthless land which produces thorns and thistles will be burned in the end. The purpose for burning such a field is to destroy that which is useless, not to preserve it. In the same way, ungodly people who fail to bear good fruit will be destroyed, not preserved for eternal conscious misery.


“Bring Them Here and Kill Them in Front of Me”


Continuing with the examples of literal everlasting destruction which Jesus used in his parables, let’s look at The Parable of the Ten Minas:
Luke 19:11-14
While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once. (12) He said: “A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed as king and then to return. (13) So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas. ‘Put this money to work,’ he said, ‘until I come back.’ (14) But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, ‘We don’t want this man to be our king,’ ”
NOTE: One mina was equal to about three months wages.
The symbolism in this parable is obvious: the “man of noble birth” is referring to Jesus, the Son of God; the “distant country” where the man of noble birth goes to have himself appointed as king and then return is the world; the place he would return to is heaven; the subjects who hated this newly appointed king and rejected his kingship is referring to people in this world who love sin, hate Jesus and reject his Lordship.
Now let’s skip down to verse 27 and observe what the king in this parable — again, symbolically referring to Jesus — said should be done to these subjects who hated him and rejected his kingship: 
LUKE 19:27
‘But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them — bring them here and kill them in front of me.’ 
The king having his subjects who hated and rejected him brought before him is an obvious symbolic reference to the white throne judgment (Revelation 20:11-15) and possibly the pre-millennial judgment of Christ as well (Matthew 25:31-46) both cases in which those who reject Jesus as Lord will be thrown into the lake of fire to suffer the second death. Notice what the king in the parable ordered should be done with these subjects who utterly rejected him — he said that they should be brought before him and killed in front of him!
NOTE: The “pre-millennial judgment of Christ” is also known as “the judgment of living nations.”
afterlifeIf the destiny of ungodly people who reject Christ is eternal life being consciously tormented in the lake of fire, then Jesus would have certainly reflected it in this parable because the secondary purpose of this story is to reveal the eternal fate of those who reject the Lordship of Christ. Surely Jesus, the Son of God, could’ve easily come up with a clear way to reflect the doctrine of eternal torture in this parable (as well as his other parables). He could have said something like, “But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them — bring them here and torture them in front of me, but be sure not to kill them, just torment them day and night, week after week, month after month, year after year, decade after decade. And all the while I’ll just kick back and pay no mind to it.” Yes, I realize how ridiculous this sounds, but I want to illustrate how absolutely absurd and unbiblical this doctrine is.
Let’s face it if a king or ruler were to actually do this in the real world, no one in their right mind would hesitate to declare them unjust, wicked and perverse, no matter how evil the subjects might be. By contrast there’s nothing wrong with a king or ruler justly, but mercifully, executing such wicked rebels.
Summing this parable up, let me emphasize that Jesus was teaching this parable in part to back-up and reveal the scriptural truth of what will happen to those who reject him as Lord. What will happen to them? According to Jesus in this parable, they will be brought before the King of Kings and killed in front of him. This will be accomplished by simply casting them into the lake of fire where raging fire will consume them (Hebrews 10:26-27). Could Jesus be any clearer? His words perfectly coincide with the numerous passages we’ve already looked at.


“They Will Be Thrown into the Fiery Furnace”


Jesus also likened the lake of fire to a “fiery furnace” in Matthew 13:42 and 50. Like Gehenna, “fiery furnace” is an excellent example of the lake of fire because it clearly indicates nothing other than complete incinerationtotal destruction of soul and body — as Jesus explicitly stated earlier in Matthew 10:28.
The Messiah most likely got this apt figure from the Old Testament Scriptures since he studied and preached from them. In the Old Testament “furnace” or “fiery furnace” is used in reference to complete incineration or refinement (e.g. Psalm 12:6) but never to undying conscious torment. For instance, after the utter obliteration of Sodom and Gomorrah, which is a biblical example of the second death (2 Peter 2:6), Genesis 19:28 states that there was only “dense smoke rising from the land, like smoke from a furnace.”
Notice how the figure of “fiery furnace” is used in this Psalm text: 
PSALM 21:9
At the time of your appearing you will make them [God’s enemies] like a fiery furnace. In his wrath the LORD will swallow them up, and his fire will consume them.
There’s no mistaking here that “fiery furnace” refers to being utterly consumed by raging fire as God’s enemies are shown to be swallowed up and consumed by his fire, not ludicrously existing in a perpetual state of conscious roasting.
In Daniel chapter three, the fiery furnace was so hot that it killed Nebuchadnezzar’s soldiers who simply went near it as they threw the three Israelites — Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego — into it (Daniel 3:22-23). The only reason the three Israelites survived the fiery furnace was because of God’s supernatural protection (verse 27).
“Furnace” was also used by the prophet Malachi in the last chapter of the last book of the Old Testament to describe the day when God will judge evildoers: “That day will burn like a furnace” and “not a root or branch will be left to them” for “they will be ashes” (Malachi 4:1-3). We will examine this passage in more detail shortly.
As you can see, “furnace” in the Old Testament consistently signifies complete incineration, destruction and death, but never perpetual conscious torment.
We can confidently conclude that, if God does not miraculously intervene as he did with Daniel’s three friends who were not harmed by the fiery furnace (Daniel 3:13-27), the ungodly who will be thrown into the fiery furnace of Gehenna will suffer the precise fate of what the enemies of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednigo hoped for them: death by incineration (Fudge 104-105).


Consuming Fire Will Consume the Enemies of God


Which brings us to another proof text:
HEBREWS 10:26-27
If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, (27) but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God
Notice clearly that, on judgment day, raging fire will utterly consume God’s enemies, not sadistically torture them without end. The Greek word translated as “consume” here literally means “to eat” and is translated as “devour” in the King James Version. We can soundly conclude that raging fire will literally devour God’s enemies when they’re cast into the lake of fire — consuming them wholly.
This brings to mind James 5:1-5 which issues out a warning to rich oppressors. Verse 3 states: “Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire.” The word “testify” indicates that James is referring to a time of judgment; this is made clearer in verse 5: “You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter.” “The day of slaughter” is, of course, a reference to “the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men” (2 Peter 3:7). Notice that the day of judgment is referred to as “the day of slaughter,” not “the day of the beginning of everlasting conscious torment” (sounds absurd, doesn’t it?). That’s because the day of judgment is a day of slaughter where the sins of God’s enemies will testify against them and “eat their flesh like fire” — raging fire will utterly consume them just as Paul taught in Hebrews 10:27 shown above.
It is fitting, incidentally, that James refers to the day of judgment as the day of slaughter, since Gehenna, the Biblical example of the lake of fire, often translated as “hell,” was otherwise known as “the Valley of Slaughter” (see Jeremiah 7:30-34 and 19:2-13). 


Examples of God Consuming His Enemies Throughout History


The New Testament declaration that, at the second death, God will utterly destroy his human enemies — soul and body — by raging, consuming fire is in perfect harmony with the many Old Testament historical cases of how God dealt with his enemies then. Here’s one example:
LEVITICUS 10:1-2
Aaron’s sons Nadab and Abihu took their censors, put fire in them and added incense; and they offered unauthorized fire before the LORD, contrary to his command. (2) So fire came out from the presence of the LORD and consumed them, and they died before the LORD
We see here that Nadab and Abihu ignored God’s commands and attempted to approach Him on their own terms. As a result “fire came out from the presence of the LORD and consumed them, and they died before the LORD.” Their disregard for the LORD’s will and attempt to approach Him on their own terms represents religion as opposed to Christianity. Religion is the human attempt to connect with God whereas Christianity is God connecting with humanity through Christ. We can either do it our way or God’s way; it’s our choice.
The fiery consumption of Nadab and Abihu is a biblical example of what will happen on judgment day to people who disregard God’s Word and live their lives with little or no concern of their Creator; these proud rebels are only willing to approach God on their own terms. On judgment day such people can expect a fire to come out from the presence of the LORD and consume them. They will die before the LORD, just as assuredly as Nadab and Abihu did.
Here are a few more examples:
NUMBERS 16:35
And fire came out from the LORD and consumed the 210 men [Korah’s followers] who were offering the incense. 
2 KINGS 1:10
Elijah answered the captain, “If I am a man of God, may fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty men!” Then fire fell from heaven and consumed the captain and his men.
NOTE: This exact same judgment came upon another captain and his fifty men as shown in verse 12.
PSALM 97:2b-3
…righteousness and justice are the foundation of his throne. (3) Fire goes before him and consumes his foes on every side. 
PSALM 106:18
Fire blazed among their followers [Dathan’s rebellious followers]; a flame consumed the wicked
EZEKIEL 22:31
“So I will pour out my wrath on them [the sinful people of Judah] and consume them with my fiery anger, bringing down on their own heads all they have done, declares the Sovereign LORD.” 
Just as God dealt with his enemies in the past, so he will deal with his enemies in the future at the second advent of Christ when God’s consuming fire will strike the whole earth and “Babylon”:
ZEPHANIAH 1:18
Neither their silver nor their gold will be able to save them on the day of the LORD’s wrath. In the fire of his jealousy the whole world will be consumed for he will make a sudden end of all who live on the earth.
REVELATION 18:8-9
Therefore in one day her plagues will overtake her [“Babylon”]: death, mourning and famine. She will be consumed by fire, for mighty is the Lord God who judges her. (9) When the kings of the earth who committed adultery with her and shared her luxury see the smoke of her burning, they will weep and mourn over her. 
202586As you can plainly see, the biblical fact that God is going to destroy his human enemies by a consuming fire at the second death perfectly coincides with how God has dealt with his human enemies throughout history. This is testimony to the unchanging, consistent character of God (see Psalm 102:26-27, James 1:17 and Hebrews 13:8). Wouldn’t it be strange and totally inconsistent with God’s just, merciful character as revealed throughout history if, on judgment day, he sentenced his human enemies to never-ending roasting torment — a sadistic, unjust, merciless sentence diametrically opposed to his consistent, unchanging character? Of course it would.
Notice clearly in all the above texts that God does not wickedly torture these people with fire. No, the fire consumes them. No doubt there’s an amount of terror and conscious pain to this type of execution, but it’s not sadistically never-ending — it mercifully results in death.
Is this unjust on God’s part? Not at all. Notice Psalm 97:2-3 above: before stating that God will judge and destroy his enemies with consuming fire, it assuredly states that “righteousness and justice are the foundation of his throne.” You see, we can always be absolutely confident of the fact that God’s judgments are completely righteous and just; and God is not quick in making a judgment; he is “compassionate and gracious, slow to anger abounding in love” (Psalm 103:8); “he is patient… not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9b). Yet, there’s a limit to God’s patience and mercy if a stubborn person continually chooses to resist and rebel against him; and when his patience and mercy end, his judgment begins. Yet even God’s judgments are balanced by his mercy and justice.


“They Will Be Ashes Under the Soles of Your Feet”


The very last chapter of the Old Testament also plainly reveals how God’s enemies will be utterly consumed in a fiery “furnace:”
MALACHI 4:1-3,5
“Surely the day is coming; it will burn like a furnace. All the arrogant and every evildoer will be stubble, and that day that is coming will set them on fire,” says the LORD Almighty. “Not a root or branch will be left to them. (2) But for you who revere my name, the sun of righteousness will arise with healing in its wings. And you will go out and leap like calves released from the stall. (3) Then you will trample down the wicked; they will be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day when I do these things,” says the LORD Almighty. (5) “See, I will send you the prophet Elijah before the great and dreadful day of the LORD comes.”
So ends the Old Testament, followed by the period of 400-years silence between the testaments where God would not speak through Scripture prophecy. Like the final chapters of Revelation (the last book of the New Testament) the final chapter of Malachi (the last book of the Old Testament) contrasts the final destinies of both the righteous and the unrighteous: For those who revere God’s name, “the sun of righteousness will arise with healing in its wings.” They will experience warmth and healing in the light of His presence as He binds up their bruises, heals their wounds and wipes away every tear (see Isaiah 30:26 and Revelation 21:4).
The righteous will “go out and leap like calves released from the stall.” In other words, just as a calf leaps for sheer joy when finally turned loose into the sunlight after being confined to a stall for extended periods of time, so it will be with those who revere God’s name.
As for those who do not revere God’s name, “all the arrogant” and “every evildoer,” they will be like stubble set on fire; they will be burned up so completely that “not a root or branch will be left to them”; they will be like ashes under the soles of the feet of the righteous. These easy-to-understand figures eliminate any possibility of remnant or survivor. A clearer example of literal destruction could hardly be given.
Thus ends the Old Testament with the righteous ultimately rejoicing in God’s salvation and eternal life while evildoers are utterly destroyedgone forever with no remnant or possibility of restoration.
Once again, there is no mention whatsoever of people existing forever in a perpetual state of fiery conscious torment. All we see is a clear picture of “every evildoer” being utterly and totally destroyed by raging, consuming fire.


Is Malachi 4:1-5 Applicable to Everlasting Destruction?


The above passage is such a strong stumbling block to the view of eternal torment that advocates of this view try to dismiss it altogether, suggesting that the text is referring to the battle of Armageddon on the day of Christ’s second advent and thus is not applicable to the second death.
In light of this contention, let’s look at all the scriptural facts and draw a sound conclusion:
The passage is referring to “the day of the Lord” (verses 1,3 and 5). What is “the day of the LORD?” This phrase appears 19 times in the Old Testament and 4 times in the New Testament to express the time of God’s extreme judgment and wrath.
These 23 texts do not all refer to the same specific judgment. For instance, in Ezekiel 30:3 “the day of the LORD” refers to a near future (now historical) judgment of Egypt; in Zechariah 14:1 and 2 Thessalonians 2:2 it refers to a far future judgment.
Two “day of the LORD” expressions yet remain to be fulfilled: 1. At the end of the 7-year tribulation period or Daniel’s 70th week (see Joel 3:14), and 2. At the end of the millennium (see 2 Peter 3:10). Both of these specific judgments result in condemned people being thrown into the lake of fire: The pre-millennial judgment of Christ will take place at the end of the 7-year tribulation period (see Matthew 25:31-46) otherwise know as the judgment of living nations; and the great white throne judgment will take place at the end of the millennium (see Revelation 20:11-15).
Malachi 4:1-5 is applicable to either of these judgments.
Secondly, Malachi 4:1-5 coincides perfectly with a text we’ve already examined, Matthew 13:40-43, which is an unquestionable reference to the second death. Observe how well these texts parallel each other:
“Surely the day is coming; it will burn like a furnace.” ~ Malachi 4:1a
“They [the angels] will throw them into the fiery furnace,” ~ Matthew 13:42
“All the arrogant and every evildoer will be stubble and that day that is coming will set them on fire.” ~ Malachi 4:1b
“As weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age.” ~ Matthew 13:40
“But for you who revere my name, the sun of righteousness will arise with healing in its wings.” ~ Malachi 4:2
“Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father.” ~ Matthew 13:43
As you can see, both texts liken the lake of fire to a blazing furnace; both texts liken “evildoers” to combustible matter that will be burned up (“stubble” and “weeds”); both texts reveal that, after all evildoers are destroyed, the righteous will shine like the sun; and both texts reveal that all that will be left of the ungodly will be ashes (Malachi 4 expressly states this in verse 3 whereas Matthew 13 implies it with the figure of “weeds… burned in the fire”).
Since these are clearly coinciding passages both refer to the ultimate end of the ungodly in the lake of fire, the second death.
612440Thirdly, notice that Malachi 4:1 refers to a time when “all the arrogant and every evildoer” will be destroyed. Biblically, we know that all evildoers will not be destroyed until “the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men” (2 Peter 3:7) when all “the wicked will be no more” (Psalm 37:10).
Fourthly, notice that Malachi 4:1 states that “Not a root or branch will be left to them” and verse 3 states that all evildoers will be “ashes.” Both verses are figurative, but the picture they intend to portray is clear: there will be nothing left of the ungodly but ashes when God’s raging fire consumes them. They will be totally destroyed — both soul and body as Jesus solemnly declared.
No mention is made anywhere of their souls living forever in a state of fiery conscious torment. If this perverse religious belief were true, why would the LORD leave out something of such importance? This is way too significant of a “detail” to leave out.
Lastly, it just makes good sense that the Old Testament would sign off with a clear declaration of the final destiny of both the righteous and the unrighteous just as the New Testament does.
In light of all this support, we can confidently conclude that Malachi 4:1-5 is indeed applicable to the subject of everlasting destruction.


The Example of The Death of Jesus


The very death of Jesus Christ on the cross is an example of literal everlasting destruction. Jesus suffered God’s wrath and died so that we don’t have to. Theologians refer to this as “substitutionary death.” All this means is that Jesus suffered and died in our place; he was sacrificed for our sakes so that we don’t have to reap the wages of our sin. The Bible states:
HEBREWS 2:9b
…he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.
We see here that Jesus suffered and tasted death for everyone. This is what God would have had to do to us on judgment day if Jesus hadn’t suffered and died in our place. In other words Jesus suffered the very penalty that we were to suffer, and that penalty is suffering that ends in death.
Jesus didn’t die for us so that we don’t have to experience earthly death, the first death; he died for us so that we don’t have to suffer the second death. So Christ’s death on the cross is a window for us of what the second death essentially is; and the only view we see through this window is suffering that ends in death, not never-ending conscious torture. Unlike the ungodly people cast into the lake of fire, who will suffer everlasting destruction, Jesus rose from the dead “because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him” (Acts 2:24b) (Fudge/Peterson 204). God had to raise Jesus from the dead, otherwise we would not be justified and have the hope of eternal life (see 1 Corinthians 15:12-22 and Romans 10: 9-10).
The bottom line is that Jesus “tasted death for everyone,” he didn’t taste eternal conscious torture for us, he tasted death. If Jesus’ substitutionary death had to consist of what supporters of eternal torture say the wages of sin is then Jesus would have to still be suffering never-ending torment. Are you following?
Jesus’ suffering and death in our place on this earth is a picture of what the second death will be on judgment day in the spiritual realm. And the simple fact is that Jesus suffered and died; this is what people witnessed when he was horribly crucified and this is what we see today when we picture it. Death is what we are saved from not eternal conscious torture, for “the wages of sin is death.”


Apollumi as “Lost” (the Lost Sheep and Prodigal Son)


In Chapter One we examined the Greek word apollumi (ah-POHL-loo-mee). We saw how the usual definition of this word — “to destroy fully” (Strong 14) — is applicable to the second death of the ungodly because Jesus used apollumi to describe the utter incineration of Sodom and Gomorrah, which is an example of the second death.
NOTE: As stated in a previous note, Jesus no doubt spoke in Hebrew or Aramaic during his earthly ministry, but biblical writers recorded his words in Greek under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Like many words, apollumi has secondary definitions; one of its secondary definitions is “lost.” A good example of apollumi used in this manner would be Luke 19:10 where Jesus states, “For the Son of Man came to seek and save what was lost (apollumi).” In this text unredeemed people are said to be “lost” — but lost from what? And lost in what sense? Let’s look at two parables where Jesus answers these questions.
The first parable we’ll examine is The Parable of the Lost Sheep. As we read this passage notice how apollumi is translated as “lost” and “loses”:
LUKE 15:3-7
Then Jesus told them this parable: (4) “Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses (apollumi) one of them. Does he not leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the lost (apollumi) sheep until he finds it? (5) And when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders (6) and goes home. Then he calls his friends and neighbors together and says, ‘Rejoice with me; I have found my lost (apollumi) sheep!’ (7) I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent.”
As you can see, Jesus likens an unsaved person who is lost from God to a lost sheep that has strayed from its shepherd. Obviously apollumi means “lost” primarily in the sense that the sheep was lost from its shepherd. But what would have happened to the lost sheep if the shepherd had not gone to save it? Jesus doesn’t say, but he doesn’t have to as everyone knows that a lost sheep, separated from the protective care of its shepherd, would die — prey to predators — if not found. So the sheep was not only lost in the sense that it was lost from its shepherd, but lost in the sense that it would ultimately perish if not saved as well.
In the same way, a sinner who is lost from God will most certainly perish if not saved; they will suffer everlasting destruction of soul and body in hell (Gehenna). This is the second death. That’s why sinners are said to be “perishing” in the Scriptures (e.g. 1 Corinthians 1:18); they’re lost from God and on their way to ultimate perishment.
Apollumi is also translated as “lost” in The Parable of the Lost Son, perhaps better known as the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32). This popular parable tells the story of a man who has two sons. The younger son demands his monetary share of the estate and then leaves for a distant country to waste his wealth on sinful living. After blowing all his money he resorts to getting a job feeding pigs. At this desperate point he longs to fill his stomach with the pods the pigs were eating, but no one gave him anything. This is when he finally comes to his senses:
LUKE 15:17-24
“When he finally came to his senses he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired men have food to spare, and here I am starving to death! (18) I will set out and go back to my father and say to him: Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. (19) I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me like one of your hired men.’ (20) So he got up and went to his father.
But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his arms around him and kissed him. (21) The son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’ (22) But the father said to his servants, ‘Quick! Bring the best robe and put it on him. Put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. (23) Bring the fattened calf and kill it. Let’s have a feast and celebrate. (24) For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost (apollumi) and is found!’ So they began to celebrate.”
202592As you can see, this parable is very similar to The Parable of the Lost Sheep. The main difference being that this tale is dealing with a lost person rather than a lost animal.
The Greek word apollumi in this parable means “lost” in the very same way it does in The Parable of the Lost Sheep: 1. The wayward son was lost to his father in the sense that his relationship with him was dead — that is, they no longer had a relationship, it ceased to exist. His son was consequently as good as dead to him. That’s why the father exclaims when the son returns, “For this son of mine was dead and is alive again.” Once the father’s son returned, their relationship resumed and he consequently became “alive” to him again. 2. Like the lost sheep who would have perished apart from the protective care of its shepherd, the prodigal son was also lost in the sense that he would have perished if he didn’t return to his father. This conclusion is supported by verse 17 which says that the lost son would have starved to death if he hadn’t “come to his senses” and returned to the father.
In the same way, lost sinners are dead to the Heavenly Father — they are incapable of having a real relationship with him due to spiritual death — and are on their way to “starving to death” apart from him. Unless they “come to their senses” and repent of their sin (accepting Jesus as Lord, of course) they will indeed perish in the absolute sense.


 Apollumi as “Lose”


As observed in our reading of The Parable of the Lost Sheep above, the Greek word apollumi can also mean ‘lose:’ “ ‘Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses (apollumi) one of them.’ ” As already determined, apollumi means “lose” here in the sense that the lone sheep was lost from its shepherd and would’ve certainly perished if not found.
Let’s look at a couple other examples of apollumi translated as “lose:”
MATTHEW 10:42
“And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones because he is my disciple, I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose (apollumi) his reward.”
Apollumi here obviously refers to suffering the loss of (or being deprived of) a reward.
In this next example Paul encourages the crew of a ship that none of them will lose their lives in the storm:
ACTS 27:34b
“Not one of you will lose (apollumi) a single hair from your head.”
Paul assured the crew that none of them would suffer the loss of even a single hair.
As you can plainly see from these three examples, apollumi simply means “lose” in the sense of suffering the loss of something — a sheep, a reward, a hair.


The Ungodly Will Lose Their Life Body & Soul


With the above understanding, let’s observe how the exact same Greek word, apollumi, is used in reference to unredeemed people ultimately losing their very lives
LUKE 9:23-25
Then he said to them all: “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. (24) For whoever wants to save his life will lose (apollumi) it, but whoever loses (apollumi) his life for me will save it. (25) What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, and yet lose (apollumi) or forfeit his very self.”
Jesus states in the latter half of verse 24 that “whoever loses his life for me will save it.” What exactly does this mean? Well, when a person is born again – repenting of sin and confessing Christ as Lord (Acts 26:20Romans 10:9-10) — they miraculously become “a new creation; the old is gone, the new has come!” (2 Corinthians 5:17). The spiritual part of their being is born anew. That’s why Paul proclaimed, “I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me” (Galatians 2:20). This is basically what Jesus meant by “losing your life for him.” So Jesus was simply saying that anyone who gets spiritually born-again will save his/her life. (See Appendix B Understanding Human Nature for more details on this).
This is in contrast to anyone who tries to save his or her own life; for as Jesus declares in the first part of verse 24 — such a person will lose his or her life! We’ve all been “bought” and saved by God at a great price — the sacrifice of his Son, Jesus Christ. We are therefore “not our own” (1 Corinthians 6:19-20). People who reject this sacrifice are essentially trying to keep or save their own lives. They know that if they truly acknowledge the Lordship of Christ, they’ll have to give up living for their fleshly desires and start living for God. This means that they’ll have to give up (repent of) sin; unfortunately, many people don’t want to do this because they love their sinful lifestyles and don’t want anyone telling them what they morally can or can’t do (see John 3:19-20). They don’t want Christianity, they want Selfianity or fleshianity. (I guess they don’t realize the obvious fact that God wants Lordship over our lives and instructs us to do, or not do, certain things for our ultimate benefit and blessing, not to deprive us). As Jesus points out here, such people will end up losing their lives.
This fact is reinforced in verse 25: “What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, and yet lose (apollumi) or forfeit his very self.” Notice how the word “gain” is used in contrast to “lose” and “forfeit;” we can therefore soundly conclude that lose and forfeit would be the exact opposite of gaining something. Now notice what Jesus said a person who tries to “save his own life” will lose or forfeit: he said that he would lose or forfeit his very self!
The Greek word translated “self” here is heautou (heh-ow-TOO) which simply refers to a person’s selfhood, that is, a person’s very being (and therefore is translated variously as “himself,” “herself,” “myself,” “yourself,” “ourselves,” etc.). In the matching gospel accounts of this verse — Matthew 16:26 and Mark 8:36 — the word “soul” is used instead of self. “Soul” in these passages is translated from the Greek word psuche (soo-KAY) which can also be translated “life” in proper contexts, as is the case in verse 24 where Jesus stated, “whoever wants to save his life (psuche) will lose it.”
The conclusion we must draw from all this information is simply this: a person who rejects giving up her life for Christ will end up losing her life, her soul, her very self.
This exact thought is similarly expressed by Jesus in this verse:
LUKE 17:33
“Whoever tries to keep his life will lose (apollumi) it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it.”
How much clearer could Jesus possibly be? The only people who will preserve their lives for eternal life are people who are willing to give up their lives for Christ (which, once again, means getting born-again and thus being “crucified with Christ;” and growing spiritually from there). People who refuse to do this will lose their lives.
Let’s look at one last similar expression from Jesus:
JOHN 12:25
“The man who loves his life will lose (apollumi) it, while the man who hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life.”
Jesus isn’t saying that Christians can’t enjoy living while in this world (on the contrary, 1 Peter 1:8 states that believers will be “filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy”), he’s simply teaching in line with the biblical fact that true Christians are strangers in this world (Hebrews 11:131 Peter 1:1) who “are looking forward to a new heaven and new earth, the home of righteousness” (2 Peter 3:13).
The reason Christians are said to be strangers in this world and “hate” their lives on earth is because the present condition of this world is not the way God wants it to be. Consider, for example, the pain, death, disease, injustice, poverty, atrocities, immorality, wars and crime evident all over this world.
NOTE: “Hate” here is translated from a Greek word which by extension means “to love less” (Strong 48).
All these evils are evidence that the devil is “the god of this world;” in other words, the whole world is under his influence or control (see 2 Corinthians 4:41 John 5:19). Revelation 21:1-4, on the other hand, reveals how our good, just, loving God wants life to be on earth, for when he creates a “new earth” there will be “no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away” (verse 4).
Getting back to our text, Jesus is simply stating that a person who hates his or her life in this world in the above manner “will keep it for eternal life.” By contrast, those who love their sinful, rebellious lifestyles in this wicked world and reject giving up their lives to Christ’s Lordship will ultimately end up losing their lives.
When exactly will these selfish people who reject God’s grace lose their lives, their souls, their very selves? Obviously on “the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men” (2 Peter 3:7) where God will “destroy both soul and body in hell (Gehenna)” (Matthew 10:28).
Please notice in all these passages that Jesus repeatedly stresses that ungodly people will lose their very lives if they don’t accept the gospel. He’s says absolutely nothing about people keeping their lives and spending it in never-ending roasting agony. This perverse belief is a false, unbiblical doctrine and needs to be exposed for what it is. That’s what this study is all about.


Examples of Everlasting DestructionNot Eternal Conscious Torment


Let’s briefly review the many examples of literal everlasting destruction that we’ve covered in this chapter. Take note of how the eternal torture position does not fit any of these examples:
1. The very word “hell” itself is an unmistakable example of literal everlasting destruction as Gehenna, the Biblical word translated as “hell” in reference to the lake of fire, was a very certain symbol of destruction which all of Jesus’ listeners readily understood.
2. Jesus and John the Baptist proclaimed that “at the end of the age” (i.e. judgment day) the unrighteous will be like weeds, trees, branches and chaff thrown into fire. It goes without saying that combustible articles like these burn up in fire. We also viewed similar examples from the Old Testament and the book of Hebrews.
3052093. In The Parable of the Ten Minas Jesus used the example of a king having his enemies brought before him and executed.
4. Jesus twice spoke of the lake of fire as a “fiery furnace” — an unmistakable figure of complete incineration as revealed in the Old Testament. Articles thrown into a furnace are burned up, not perpetually preserved.
5. We viewed many examples of how God consumed his human enemies by fire throughout history and saw that these examples perfectly coincide with the clear biblical passages which state that God’s enemies will be consumed by raging fire at the second death (e.g. Hebrews 10:27 and Psalm 20:9).
6. At the very end of the Old Testament we viewed an unmistakable example of ungodly people being likened to stubble set ablaze; “not a root or branch will be left to them” as they will be “ashes under the soles of [the righteous’] feet.”
7. We discovered that the very crucifixion of Jesus Christ is an example of the second death. Jesus suffered God’s wrath on the cross and died. He was sacrificed in our place. This is a window for us to view the essential nature of the second death, and the clear picture we see through this window is one of suffering that ends in death, not never-ending torture.
8. We also observed the examples of the lost sheep, which would have perished if not saved by its shepherd, and “the prodigal (lost) son,” who would have “starved to death” if he didn’t make the wise decision to repent and return to his father.
9. Lastly, we witnessed how these many clear examples are backed up by Jesus’ declarations that those who reject God’s sacrifice for their sins and try to “save their own lives” will end up losing their lives, their souls, their very selves.
As you can see from all these illustrations, not only does the Bible repeatedly declare that people will be destroyed in the lake of fire, as shown in Chapter One, it also backs up these plain declarations with numerous easy-to-understand examples of literal everlasting destruction. Those who adamantly contend that the Bible teaches eternal conscious torment for ungodly sinners are quite mistaken.