| Author | Message | ||
| Gatororeo7 (Gatororeo7) |
Hey everyone! It's been awhile since I've posted on here. Things have been quite busy for me the past few weeks with school, the baby, and other odds and ends. Anyways, I need some help. As some of you might remember, I have been working with my wife, Sara, about the errors of SDA. She has completely rejected the basics (the Sabbath and EGW) but she still tends to hold fast to some of the other false teachings, particularly about the state of the dead and hell. It's not that she's not open to the truth about it, it's just that she hasn't been shown the truth so until then she'll believe what she's been taught. I'm trying to show her from the Bible, and what I'm asking is for any websites, information, or even a general overview that I can give her that will expose her to the truth. Any and all help would be appreciated. Thanks, Joel | ||
| Sabra (Sabra) |
Don't have any geat websites, but what about the Bible?  Phillipians 1:21-24: Paul says: For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if I live on in the flesh, this will mean fruit from my labor, yet what I shall choose I cannot tell. For I am hard pressed between the two, having a desire to depart and be with Christ,(that pretty much does it for the soul sleep doctrine) which is far better. Nevertheless to remain in the flesh is more needful for you. 2 Corinthians 5:1-9 For we know that if our earthly house, this tent, is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house, not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.(yeah, he said, ETERNAL IN THE HEAVENS) For in this tent we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed with our habitation which is from heaven. if indeed, having been clothed, we shall not be found naked. For we who are in this tent groan, being burdened, not because we want to be unclothed, but further clothed, that mortality may be swallowed up by life. Now He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who also has given us the Spirit as a guarantee. Therefore we are always confident, knowing that while we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord. For we walk by faith, not by sight, We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord. The scripture in Ecclesiastes that the SDA's use says that the living know they will die but the dead know nothing. I think it is grossely taken out of context. Solomon wrote this book and the whole book is about vanity of life without God. Several times in the bible the unsaved are referred to as dead. Jesus told the man who wanted to leave for a funeral to let the dead bury their dead and come on with the living! I think the dead spoken of in Ecclesiates are the unsaved, it goes on to say, the dead know nothing, neither do they have any more reward for they are forgotten. The saved are not forgotten, they haven't lost their reward so it can't mean the saved. Romans 8:38 says nothing, not even death can separate us from the love of God. I don't think Paul would have counted it gain to be sleeping in the grave for the past 2000 years. | ||
| Jerry (Jerry) |
try these: http://www.truthorfables.com/Death_and_Hell.htm http://www.gospeloutreach.net/soul_sleep_error.html http://www.gospeloutreach.net/state_of_the_dead.html http://www.christiancommunitychurch.us/dovenet/dethmenu.htm http://www.ratzlaf.com/Saul%20&%20Samuel%20Gladson.pdf | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
The Bible was what really helped me to understand the soul and the fallacy of soul sleep. It seems that there is a pretty predictable pattern in which Adventists discover Biblical truths. The first line of defense to fall is usually the IJ and consequently EGW. Then comes THE BIGGIE: The Sabbath. Once an Adventist understands how Jesus fulfills the Sabbath in the New Covenant, the next doctrine to come into focus is soul sleep. Following soul sleep (and related to it but not simultaneous) is hell. For me, those texts Sabra shared above were critical. A corresponding phenomenon for me was reading about the Holy Spirit. I actually found two old books in my bookcase that I hadn't remembered I had there. One was 'Like a Mighty Wind" by Mel Tari, and one was "From Prison to Praise" by --his name escapes me at the moment. As I read those books, I began to realize that we HAD to have spirits that were something other than the breath in our nostrils. We had to have a part of ourselves that communicates with God. As I read those books and kept going back to the Bible and reading there about the spirit, I began to realize that the spirit that goes to God is the part of us that KNOWS Him. It's not merely the air in our noses. Ask God to help you and your wife to know what to study and to lead you and her to materials that will help her understand the truth. God really has been faithful to guide me to books that I needed to read at the moment I read them. Just know that her doctrinal discovery is right on target as compared to that of most other formers that I know! BTW, I'm reading an excellent book by Packer right now called Keeping In Step with the Spirit. It's good to hear from you, Joel--I've been wondering how you are and continuing to pray for you and your wife. Colleen | ||
| Clay (Clay) |
The truth about the dead and hell is an interesting topic. Colleen I agree with you regarding the state of the dead. There are far too many texts to not come to the conclusion that our soul's do have an existance apart from out bodies at death. What that existance is for sure I think is not real clear. I certainly do not see any evidence that our spirit's (soul's) come down to earth to watch over our loved-ones....etc. as I hear so much of from some Christians. That may have been a wonderful idea but is not at all biblical from my perspective. Does our spirit have an existance with God until the 2nd coming ,I believe the answer is yes. 2Cor.4:16 in NLT says, "though our bodies are dying, our spirits are being renewed every day." The NLT translates 2Cor.5:1 this way, "For we know that when this eartly tent we live in is taken down - when we die and leave these bodies- we will have a home in heaven, an eternal body made for us by God himself and not by human hands. My understanding is that because of sin, we come into the world spiritually dead (seperated from God) and that it is because of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ that we are able to experience a new birth (our spirits are made alive) and we enter into a relationship with God on a spiritual level as well as probably an intellectual and emotional level. Paul says the Holy Spirit bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God. This is more than mere intellectual acceptance and belief. Its the absolute certainty deep within us that we are united with the Godhead in the spiritual deminsion of our being. The truth of hell is another topic. WHAT IS THE TRUTH ABOUT HELL??? At this point I do not buy the idea of hell being a lake of fire where the wicked writhe and scream in agony for thousands of years while their loved ones who are in heaven living this blessed peaceful existance of eternity with God knowing that somewhere in the bowles of the earth they have some loved ones who are burning in a lake of molten lava (or something) but never ever being burned up. I believe there are some doctrines such as "hellfire" that Christians outside of Adventism need to seriously reconsider and take a second look at. There are more and more theologians of other denominations beginning to see that perhaps their understanding of hell cannot be just based on an allegory that Jesus told of the rich man and Lazarus. Jesus was not trying to explain what hell was but rather was trying to show that riches do not assure you a place in the kingdom and that it is the poor in spirit will find eternal salvation. 2 Pet.2:6 in NLT says ," Later he turned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into heaps of ashes and swept them off the face of the earth. He made them AN EXAMPLE of what would happen to ungodly people." Sodom and Gomorrah do not exist today. Math. 10:28 NLT , Jesus said "don't be afraid of those who want to kill you. They can only kill your body, they cannot touch your soul. Fear God who can destroy BOTH SOUL AND BODY in hell. Rev. 20-21 talk about the 1st and 2nd death and I can only see that if the first death is a literal death then the 2nd death is also literal. The difference is that the 1st death is not final whereas the 2nd death is final. Final seperation from God the source of life. Period...end of existance. Yes we can get into discussions about the phrase "forever and ever" but I think that has probably been discussed. To my understanding it means until it is consumed. It is eternal in that there will be no 2nd chance. I will look forward to your discussion on this topic. So there is no confusion, I am the Clay from the North not the mid-West. | ||
| Sabra (Sabra) |
One man said that he asked God why the good people sometimes die so young when they could continue reaching souls for the kingdom and he said God answered him and said, "Don't think that I only use people on this earth, when they die, they are being taught and instructed to preach and save souls in the millineum reign." Interesting anyhow. I'm still studying into the millineum, not real clear on all of that yet. We were taught that that was "heaven" but apparently people will be carrying on populating this earth and needing to be saved still. I wish I could agree with you Clay on hell not being forever, that is the thought that would best fit my thinking too. however, I can't find anything in the Bible that says hell isn't eternal. I don't think we really can know what hell really is. I think it must be something outside of our realm of understanding. I got to thinking, if God could just zap his creation into oblivion, wouldn't He have done that with Satan long ago? Maybe since He is eternal what He creates has to have eternal existance--somewhere? | ||
| Lucias (Lucias) |
Maybe I'm to pragmatic on this topic. My position is simply that we have a collection of texts but getting this nailed down firmly one way or the other is largely immaterial. There is a heaven There is a hell One of these two will be our ultimate abode after death There should be no communication with the dead At death our fate is sealed On this we all agree. Now how exactly all this transpires we don't really know. We have some clues from scripture. But its not spelled out that after death at T+1 minute this happens and then at T+2 minutes this other thing happens because it doesn't really matter. If one wants to think we are in an unconcious sleep for a period of time first, fine. If another wants to think its immediate fine. Neither position should trouble the other as long as the above points are still held. As to the eternal aspects of hell -vs- a short time. To me this would seem more important than the way you actually get there. However on this we still all agree that "You want to go to heaven and hell aint gonna be any fun". As with any topic there are passionate arguments on both sides and each, by virtue of using the Bible, claim God to be on their side. Dividing over this topic is exactly what Romans 14 is about. Some things matter some don't. As I've been fond of saying for some time now.... "If when you die things don't happen exactly the way you thought they would aint nobody gonna care". | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
I agree that the Bible is not difinitive about the true nature of hell. I think that perhaps literal fire is not the issue. If hell is eternal, it may be in a spiritual dimension about which we have no knowlegde on this earth. Certainly the state of our soul in death is something about which we have no literal knowledge. I suspect "fire" is a metaphor to explain something we can't grasp in our three dimensions. It may not be physical at all. I agree; we can't be dogmatic about this subject. We do know enough to know that God preserves the essential part of us that knows him. We also know that the dead do not interact with those still on earth. What hell is--is not clear. What IS clear is that it will eternally destroy any possible relationship with God, and it will involve suffering. Whether or not the literal suffering is eternal can be argued. The more I study the Bible, the more I believe that eternal suffering of some sort--not necessarily physical fire--may well be part of the deal. Eternal, searing separation from relationship would be hell. If the "living" and the "dead" can be identified even among humans on earth based on whether or not they have experienced the new birth, it makes sense that a dead spirit might be eternally disconnected from God, even after the body dies. In some ways the idea that there may be eternal suffering makes the issue of salvation even more compelling. It makes the decision to accept Christ even more significant. But again, I agree that we have no absolute statement on which to take a dogmatic stand. Clearly God wanted us to know that there are serious consequences with eternal implications for rejecting Jesus, but also clear is the fact that he chose not to reveal the specifics to us now. Perhaps we're not equipped right now even to understand the literal specifics. I am so thankful that God chooses us and saves us! Colleen | ||
| Derrell (Derrell) |
Thank you Lucias for your pragmatic observation. My view may be too simplistic, but I believe that the most important thing in the Bible is Jesus' salvation. Being an Adventist who is becoming disollutioned with the church, I have become quite wary of listening to people interpret scripture, and seeing texts pulled from here, and there to prove a point. I am afraid that it will be far too easy for me to end up trading one set of unbiblical doctrines for another. Since God created life, death, the universe and everything in it, I trust that He knows everything about it. As long as I have salvation, the rest of it is in His hands. I pray that as I read God's word, my ideas of what the Bible should say will not colour what it actually does say. God's mind,His creation, and the way that he runs things, are far bigger than my mind is capable of comprehending. I believe that death, and what happens thereafter, are things that we will not know until we experience it. Derrell | ||
| Dennis (Dennis) |
Gatororeo, Soul sleep was the last heresy we surrended in our miraculous escape from bondage and deception. I heartily recommend your reading the Christian classic on this topic, DEATH AND THE AFTERLIFE by Dr. Robert A. Morey. Dr. Morey is an internationally-known scholar. Furthermore, he repeatedly goes face to face with Leroy Froom, the noted SDA apologist for conditionalism. This book should be required reading for every Seventh-day Adventist(cost is about $15.00 soft cover). This is one of those must-read type of books. In Christ we are made alive! Dennis J. Fischer E-mail: dennisfischer@alltel.net | ||
| Clay (Clay) |
Yes I agree that the topics of death and hell are not easy ones to agree on and we probably don't have to agree. I suppose I responded as I did when Joel made the statement that Sarah was still holding on to false teachings about the state of the dead and hell, and he wanted to expose her to the truth. That sounded a little to dogmatic for me and I was compelled to respond. It has taken me 3-4 years to change my thinking on the state of the dead and it still is not set in cement and maybe never will be. I do believe there is fairly strong evidence that we have some kind of spiritual connection with God after death. What exactly that looks like, I agree with Colleen, the Bible is not definitive on that. AS Derrell said, maybe it is not really important that we know that. At the same time I believe the inspired word of God is "profitable for doctrine, reproof and instruction in rightousnes." In other words it is there for us to seek to understand the Godhead, salvation, our future(to the limits God feels we can understand), and how God would have us live day by day. In other words we cannot say as one person said to me, 'The bible is do difficult to understand so I won't study it'. I don't expect my grandson in Grade one to undestand Grade 12 Physics, but neither do I expect him to tell me that school and learning is to hard so he is not going to school any more. I don't know about the rest of you but I have grown so much in my understanding of God's word in the last 20 years of serious study,and the more I understand the more I realize there is soooo much I don't understand. There are not a lot of beliefs that I have set down in cement. One for sure. I am saved by faith alone (100%) in Jesus Christ, and that not of myself, it is a gift of God, not of my works so I will never have any reason to think of myself better than any other person on this planet. The God that I see in the bible is a loving, compassionate, longsuffering, patient,and just God and the POPULAR understanding of hell just does not fit into that picture. (Just because an understanding is popular and has been held for years by the majority does not make it correct as far as I am concerned). I just want to make one more point quickly. As a former SDA, I want to hold on to that which is good and throw out that which I have been lead to believe is bad or wrong. I think as humans we have the tendency to chuck the whole package when we see something wrong with a denomination. For example, as an former, I am aware that most SDA's write off entirely the Catholic Church or the Mormon church. I believe there are some good things to learn from both of these denominations. As a former, I also believe there are some good things I have learned as an SDA and for me one is the understanding of hell. I am open to the Holy Spirit showing me a different view however because it is not a salvation issue for me. Yes Dennis the main thing is that "In Christ we are made alive"! Praise God! It is 8 am in the North so I say to you all, "Rest in Him today and live it as if it were your last. Savor every moment" | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
The really remarkable thing for me regarding doctrines and understanding the Bible has been that since I have come to know Jesus, I can live with uncertainty with comfort and even peace. As an Adventist I always was trying figure out exactly what the Bible meant, and I despearately wanted my world views to be supported by scripture. Now I find that I am really uncertain about many things, and I actually feel relieved that I don't have to know it all. It dawned on me a couple of weeks ago that since knowing Jesus, my certainties and uncertainties have switched places. I used to be uncertain I was saved but certain I knew how the end times would look and exactly what the Bible said about doctrines. Now I am CERTAIN I am saved (praise God!) and really uncertain about the end times, hell, what death looks like, etc. I know there are certain generalities the Bible suggests, but the specifics are unclear. I am so much more comfortable living with these uncertainties than with the previous one! Praise God for Himself! Colleen | ||
| Dennis (Dennis) |
MIDNIGHT MADNESS Last night, after a very busy day, I wrote several paragraphs on the topic of death addressed to Gatororeo. Unfortunately, my dial-up ISP cut me off when I was almost ready to post, so I lost the whole message. I am sure you computer gurus out there can all relate to this type of online frustration. Time did not permit me to post another message. This morning I am literally flying through cyberspace with my new DSL connection. Wow! No more screechy noises and no more idle time limits. Actually, this newfound freedom in cyberspace is somewhat akin to the freedom of becoming Adventist-free. Dennis J. Fischer | ||
| Depinho (Depinho) |
Hello all, This is my first time on the forum but I thought I would share my opinion. I have not changed my opinion of the State of the Dead from my Adventist understanding. In fact, there are a good many others such as Dr. Jerry Gladson, Clay Peck and others who have come out of Adventism who likewise have not changed. If you want to do some thoughtful reading on the subject I have a few suggestions. A critical analysis of the passages from scholars who are not SDA and donít have an SDA background who hold the Conditionalist perspective is available. Consider the works of William Fudge who has written a very good work titled "The Fire that Consumes", or Clark Pinnock from the Reformed Church. There is also very good book out which is a joint effort by Peterson a traditionalist and Fudge where each makes his case in the same book. Peterson is one of the best current writers on the topic of the traditional view of the state of the dead and hell, while Dr. Fudge, a member of the Church of Christ holds the Conditionalist position. While I would point out that I donít believe our view of the state of the dead is a matter of salvation. I think the Biblical assertion that the wages of sin is death, should motivate us to be clear about our theology of the state of the dead. Our understanding of death will play into our understanding of the penalty for sin and therefore what we are being saved from. You see what I mean? It is something we want to study intelligently and know how the doctrine affects the larger world of our doctrine particularly when it comes to the idea of our salvation theology. Clark Pinnock perhaps the most respected theologian in the Reformed tradition came out about ten years ago in favor of the Conditionalist position. In addition to these individual scholars there are respected Protestant Reformation churches, such as the Church of England that have held the Conditionalist position for centuries. It is a reasonable historic tenant that has been argued for years outside the world of Adventism. If I remember correctly, the most recent big event in this is seen with the radical decision to change from Traditionalism to Conditionalism by the Church of Holland, again, a reformation church. While serving as a Chaplain here in England I often find headstones in the walls of ancient churches where the epitaph speaks of hoping in the resurrection day when they awake at the last day after a long sleep. This same position was much more common in America among some Baptist groups now largely faded into history. I just wanted to share some resources to consider. While I am now fully persuaded Adventism is in great error. I think a critical analysis of what we change when leaving is in order least we throw out things that could represent solid Biblical doctrine. The doctrine of the State of the Dead is not an issue which, historically, rates inclusion with the false teachings of a cult. Rather, it is one of many controversial tenants that Bible believers may reluctantly have to agree to disagree on. If they do however, I hope they take the time required to actively search the best evidence of the opposing views. Thanks for letting me take part! I will be away for the next three weeks so I wonít be able to get back to respond until then. God Bless! Chaplain Dave | ||
| Depinho (Depinho) |
Thought I would respond a bit more after re-reading some of what the others wrote above since I can't get back to it for so long. I wanted to say that the over simplified view of the human spirit as held by many Adventists is not what I would argue for. I am aware of many thinking Adventists who are conditionalists, as I am, who recognize the complexity of the issue. The danger is with over simplification. Since I introduced my note above stating that I hold the Adventist view, I need to clarify, because I am beginning to think that may mislead some who have their own understanding of just what it is that Adventists teach. I see conditionalism and a good presentation of the Adventist position as accepting all the texts that come to bear. I know that our spirit returns to God who gave it. I would simply argue that that is not the thinking element of man. I know there is something eternal with regard to those who are saved. There is a complexity here which opens the issue to disagreement. However, conditionalism, rightly I believe, sees the spirit as that eternal element that is on loan to man, that which animates him and gives him life. Our life being derived by God both at the start and after the start. The book of Titus declares that God alone is immortal. God alone has self sustaining, underived life. The rest of us have derived life. We are mortal, or subject to death. John says that those that have the Son have life and those that don't have the Son don't have life. There is both a qualitative (as in the good life) and quantitative element (as in lenght)to this and we see the idea argued back and forth by those that want to pick one element over the other. I just wanted to say, prior to other responses that may come in to my first note, that my position is essentially still conditionalism as outlined by Adventist and others. But it is not the often referenced simplicity spouted by ideologs, Adventists or otherwise. | ||
| Lydell (Lydell) |
Colleen, saw your comment way up there about the spirit being the part of us that KNOWS God. I think you are absolutely right on with that. The kind of knowing you are referring to is something that goes way beyond just something we can think or feel. It is a "knowing" that shouts thru every fiber of our being. It's an element of our relationship with God that you become aware of when everything around you is falling apart and you know you should have absolutely no hope of things coming out right. Yet there it is, that KNOWING that God is still there, still in control, and still loving you. I think we experience it too when we are praying so deeply for someone that we have come to the end of all words and all thoughts, and yet we know that somehow we are still praying...and that God is still listening. The brain and the heart are beyond the ability of expression at those times, yet there is still a part of us communicating with God at those times. We see it too in the times when we can meet someone, maybe they haven't even spoken a word yet, and yet somehow we already know they are Christians. It's the Spirit living in us testifying of His Spirit living in them. And we experience it in those times when we become vaguely unsettled, offbalance somehow, without being able to logically say why and it's just His Spirit stirring our spirit that there is something He wants changed. Yeah, there is just too much of our relationship with Him that is beyond thought, words, or feelings. Don't know if someone has already brought up the verse, hm, in the OT that says "precious in His eyes is the death of his children". Now why the heck would their deaths be a "precious" thing to HIm if it meant they would be cut off from fellowship with Him for a time thru "soul sleep"? | ||
| Dennis (Dennis) |
Chaplain Dave, Yes, the excellent book titled, "TWO VIEWS OF HELL: A Biblical & Theological Dialogue" by Edward Fudge and Robert Peterson is most helpful in understanding a topic that affects the nature of Christ, the nature of man, soteriology, Bibliology, angelology, harmartiology, eschatology, pneumatology, etc. Actually, it was this very book that helped me to understand and accept the traditionalist view. With respect to the big picture, only the traditionalist view fully integrates with the essentials of the Christian faith. As an attorney, Edward Fudge repeatedly overstates his case for conditonalism by not utilizing accepted principles of hermeneutics. Fudge does not, however, embrace soul sleep. The great Protestant reformer, John Calvin, devoted his first book to refuting the heresy of soul sleep and annihilationism. Martin Luther, at one time toyed with the idea of soul sleep to be a quick resolution to the Catholic teaching of purgatory. Significantly, Luther's subsequent writings clearly reveal that he changed his mind. Also, the major Creedal Statements and the Early Church Fathers endorsed the traditionalist view despite Leroy Froom's attempts to rewrite church history. Advocates of the nonexistent/extinction view fail to explain how such an entity could AWAIT anything. At best, such a person would only be in the memory of God--akin to the fallen sparrow. If we die like animals, why not live like one? If the conditionalists are right, why not just eat, drink, and be merry? The earthly pleasures of wicked living would far outlive the brief consequence one would pay at the end for a lifetime of sinful living. Additionally, I have come to believe that conditionalism distorts and belittles how much God hates sin. After all, conditionalists teach that a loving God would never utilize unending justice. At the very worst, the punishment is merely a slap on the wrist in the human time frame. Most of what we know about hell is what Jesus taught us(e.g., Matthew 25:46, etc.). "Fudge's argument that Christ was annihilated does not strengthen the case for annihilationism; rather it weakens it considerably. Indeed, to hold either that the God-man was annihilated on the cross or that Jesus' humanity was annihilated there brings one into conflict with orthodox Christology" (TWO VIEWS OF HELL, p. 178). Why would Stephen and Jesus earnestly plead for God to accept their soul or spirit when it is merely a life force or principle that AUTOMATICALLY returns to God at death? Several elderly, lifelong Adventists have indicated to me that they actually would PREFER their soul going to heaven at death than being separated from God--six feet under. Soul sleep and annihilationism are anti-gospel in the truest sense; namely, such views obliterate our eternal security in Christ. At the moment you place your trust in Jesus, He will give you the ultimate gift--eternal life here and now. In Christ, our souls are made alive! Only a loving and compassionate God, Who alone is immortal, would allow His immortality to be shared with man. Indeed, we serve an awesome God! Robert Peterson further states, "...according to Fudge hell is penal suffering followed by the ultimate punishment, annihilation. But this is exactly where the problem creeps in. When this view of hell is affixed to the end of the biblical scenario of last things, annihilation would constitute the end of punishment...The ungodly in hell would like for annihilation to be true" (Ibid., pp. 180,181). Truly, a quick departure into unconsciousness would be a piece of luck for the wicked. Dennis J. Fischer | ||
| Depinho (Depinho) |
Hello all, Just got back from Vacation. Rome, Venice, Florence, Pompei, Germany 2 and a half weeks of sightseeing. We are bushed! Looks like Dennis has been reading too. Thanks for your input to mine Dennis. I appreciate your position and your attachment to it. It always feels good to believe we are sure about the specifics in our doctrine. But since leaving Adventism I am not comfortable being so sure about wider issues such as this. Christ and Him Crucified, Salvation by grace alone by faith alone, these are sure and rock solid. What happens at death and the nature of man is not as sure for me. I have an opinion but would not want to say that the traditional view is anti-gospel as you have labeled conditionalism. I made that sort of mistake as an Adventist labeling the views like "Sunday worship" for instance as anti-gospel. I am not in agreement with you but I believe you have a heartfelt honest position. You did not respond to the conditionalist positions of Professors John Lott or Clark Pinnock. These men were traditionalist and moved to the conditionalist position. Have you read any of their material? What I was trying to say in my initial postings was that both positions have historical and Biblical support, and therefore neither can be labeled anti-gospel. We should be willing to leave this open to Adventists who are searching and making decisions as they move from Adventisms position to more Biblical positions in the doctrine of Grace as well as in the area of exclusiveness on truth. Don't you agree? Anyway, God bless! Ch Dave DePinho | ||
| Windmotion (Windmotion) |
I agree with you, Dave. Chrisians need to focus on what brings them together instead of their differences. A doctrine can only be labeled "anti gospel" if believing it can cause you to lose your salvation. My pastor brought this up in church last Sunday when he preached from Galatians 2:16 "... a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified." He said if you believe grace plus "something" equals salvation you won't be saved. I personally don't believe in soul sleep, but I don't see how believing in it would make me feel any less secure in my salvation. For me, it is purely an academic argument. --Hannah | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
I agree that the questions of conditionalism and traditionalism really do not affect salvation. We are saved by believing in Jesus and accepting his grace. Period. I don't mean to speak for Dennis; I'm actually speaking for myself. I think I understand what he means, however, when he says that in his mind the conditionalist view is "anti gospel". My understanding of eternal hell (and I admittedly know very little about it becaue we're not given many details in the Bible!) has accompanied a growing awareness and awe for the sovereignty of God. Eternal life is astonishing; rejecting it must be tremendously significant. When I think of annihilation being "anti gospel", I don't see that meaning that we don't embrace the gospel if we believe hell is not eternal. Rather, I've personally come to understand eternal punishment as giving weight and importance to the call Jesus makes for us to accept life. I'm not remotely implying that I believe conditionalists don't understand or fully embrace the gospel and eternal life. I'm only saying that in my own mind, a belief in eternal hell has increased my own valuing of eternity. When I was a teenager I used to purposely endure discomfort in an attempt to prepare me for the time of trouble and my probable eventual burning. I figured I stood a good chance of being lost, but I comforted myself that at least the pain wouldn't last long. Eternal life never seemed to me to be as overwhelmingly preferable to annihilation as it does to hell. Now, I realize that this reasoning is the outgrowth of my admittedly neurotic youth and childhood. I am so relieved to be freed from all that fear and worry! On the other hand, I totally relate to Dave's position that taking an absolute, arrogant position on a somewhat nebulous doctrine puts us in the same danger we have so joyfully left. For me, the question of hell is almost a relief and an affirmation of God's sovereignty and justice. In my mind it meshes more seamlessly with the gospel than does annihilation. But I admit that my own past and my own mind may color that perception, and I respect the conditionalist view in a person who holds it honestly. When we joined our church, hell was the one doctrine Richard and I could not embrace at the end of the membership class. We approached that pastor, and Richard said we had just one problem. He looked at us and said, "Hell, right?! We admitted it was so, and he said, "We would not deny you membership over the question of hell given your background. If you had come to Christianity from a completely unobservant and unbelieving background and hell was a concept you just wanted not to believe, we would ask that you study more before becoming a member." He went on to say that several evalengelical theologians also believe in annihilation. I think it's interesting that he sees an Adventist background as clearly coloring a person's thinking and understanding of scripture regarding hell. The REALLY interesting thing, though, is that as time passed and with no direct input from the church, our own personal study has led us to accept eternal hell. There is definitely room among true Christ-followers for different understandings of this issue. We can trust the Holy Spirit to lead and guide us, and on issues that matter for our eternal security, we can know that we all agree! Praise God! Colleen |
