Immortality or Resurrection, William West [best romance books of all time txt] 📗

by Christ and recorded in three of the four Gospels, and one time by James. In the rest of the New Testament Gehenna was not used, as Gentiles would not understand it; and the people not living near Jerusalem would not know what Gehenna was, that it was the name of the trash dump of Jerusalem. Just as most who read this would not know the name of the trash dump of London. John did not use Gehenna in his gospel for when he wrote the destruction of Jerusalem was passed and most believe his gospel was written to Gentiles, and Paul was an apostle to the Gentiles; neither John nor Paul used Gehenna. EVERY TIME CHRIST USED GEHENNA, ON ALL FOUR OCCASIONS IT WAS SPOKEN TO THE JEWS. Gentiles are not once threatened with destruction in Gehenna.
Today, those who believe in Hell are always warning unbelievers about going to Hell if they do not believe. Acts covers about thirty years of preaching, but not one time is anything said about Hell. Paul said he did not keep back anything that was profitable [Acts 20:20] and that he declared the whole counsel of God [Acts 20:27], yet he did not say anything about Hell in any of his letters. In about thirty years of preaching to many in many countries, he never told anyone that they would be forever tormented in Hell if they did not believe. Why? He certainly would not have omitted such a doctrine as Hell. Today it is preached as a most profitable teaching, and the fear of Hell is used to keep many going to church. Paul did not declare anything about Hell for the same reason he did not declare anything about purgatory; there are no such places.
If the lost shall be forever tormented in Hell, it is only reasonably to believe there would be many warning anyone about it, but there are none. The Hell, which is preached today, was not a part of the teaching of the apostles and early church. The same strange silence that is found through out the Old Testament is also through out the New Testament. Did God just forget to warn of the awful place some are always preaching about?
Those who believe in Hell, try to prove it by their interpretation of metaphors and symbols for they have not one plain statement in the whole Bible. The name they give it (Hell) is not in the Bible. The place they preach about is not in the Bible under any name. Its origin is Pagan to the core.
With no revelation from God about Hell, how could we: (1) Know about it. (2) Know what it is. (3) Know its name. (4) Know there will be torment in it. (5) Know it will last forever. (6) Know who or if anyone will be in it. (7) Who told us these things? God has given us not one word of revelation on it.

GOD WAS NOT SILENT ON THE FATE OF THE LOST
The apostles did tell what would be the fate of the unbelieving, but the words they used are very different than what is preached today. Most churches would throw a preacher out if he preached the lost would be destroyed, perish, die, death, or end. Death is very different than everlasting life in Hell [see chapter two, "Life and Death"]. The words used to describe the fate of the lost are miles apart from much of today's preaching.
SOME OF THE NONE SYMBOLIC GREEK WORDS USED TO DESCRIBE THE FATE OF THE LOST ARE:
[1] DEATH "For the wages of sin is DEATH" [Romans 6:23]. See chapter two "Life or Death." DEATH IS DEATH, NOT EVERLASTING LIFE WITH TORMENT; LIFE AND DEATH ARE OPPOSITES, NOT TWO KINDS OF LIFE.
Unconditional immortality makes both life and death into life in a different place. Death has been changed to be life.
1. To them, death is eternal life in Hell
2. To them, the only difference in life and death is the place where all will have eternal life. Neither one means to be dead. Both the saved and the lost will be alive and have eternal life; they just will not live at the same place.
• To them life is life in Heaven.
• To them death is life in Hell.
Death deprives us of all life. It does not give more life than we now have. It is not just a continuation of life in a different form. The resurrection restores the life death took away. It is a return to life from death, not a return of the undead to still being undead just as they were before the resurrection. The resurrection is our only hope of life after death. A change from one state of being to another state of being, moving from one place to another place, is not a resurrection.
• Moving from earth to Abraham's bosom and then moving from Abraham's bosom to Heaven is not a death or a resurrection.
• Moving from earth to Heaven or Hell is not a death or a resurrection.
o To them, no one dies; they just change their address.
DEATH IS THE BIG PROBLEM FOR UNCONDITIONAL IMMORALISTS. Innate immortality says whether it is a sinner or saint, an immortal soul cannot die and cannot be subject to death. They MUST prove that death is not death but is only a change from one kind of life to another kind of life. THEY MUST PROVE THAT DEATH IS ETERNAL LIFE, THAT DEATH IS NOT DEATH, but if they did, then they would have proven that Christ could not have died and that He has not been raised from the dead. Unconditional immoralists have taken all resurrections, both of Christ and ours, out of the Gospel. Without the resurrection death is the end of life and means our utter destruction.
The immortal soul doctrine says death is not the enemy Paul thought it to be [1 Corinthians 15:26], but the friend Plato and Greek philosophy thought it to be. IN GREEK PHILOSOPHY THE PREACHING OF THE RESURRECTION WAS FOOLISHNESS FOR DEATH WAS A GATEWAY TO A BETTER LIFE. IN TODAY TEACHING DEATH HAS REPLACED THE RESURRECTION BY BEING THE GATEWAY TO A BETTER LIFE IN HEAVEN.
"The words of the Bible contain all the ideas in it. These words, then, rightly understood, and the ideas are clearly perceived. The words and sentences of the Bible are to be translated, interpreted, and understood according to the same code of laws and principles of interpretation by which other ancient writings are translated and understood; for, when God spoke to man in his own language, He spoke as one person converses with another-IN THE FAIR, STIPULATED, AND WELL-ESTABLISHED MEANING OF THE TERMS. This is essential to its character, as a revelation from God; otherwise, it would be no revelation, but would always require a class of inspired men to unfold and reveal its true sense to mankind." A. Campbell, "The Christian System," Page 3, Gospel Advocate, 1970.
In today's teaching of an immortal part of a person that is not subject to death, and death cannot be used "IN THE FAIR, STIPULATED, AND WELL-ESTABLISHED MEANING OF THE TERMS." Death must be changed to be life.
1. "The END of these things is death" Romans 6:21
2. "Whose END is destruction" Philippians 3:19
3. "Whose END is to be burned" Hebrews 6:18
4. "Sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth DEATH" James 1:15
5. "Sin unto DEATH" Romans 6:16
6. "Wages of sin is DEATH" Romans 6:23
7. “For if you live according to the flesh, you must DIE” [Romans 8:13]
THE WORLD'S GREATEST SCHOLARSHIP IS COLLECTIVELY SEEN IN THE TRANSLATIONS AS TO THE MEANING OF [1] DEATH [2] APOLLUMI [3] APOLIA [4] OLETHROS [5] PHTHIRO [6] PHTHORA [7] KATAPHILEO [8] "PASSES AWAY...ABIDES FOREVER" [9] EXOLOTHREUO [10] KATARGEO, AND [11] DESTROY BY THE WAY THEY TRANSLATED THEM. THE TRANSLATORS CHOSE WORDS THAT TO THE AVERAGE MIND CONVEY THE END OF LIFE, NOT LIFE IN ANOTHER LOCATION. The Bible is not a physics textbook and does not give a scientific definition of annihilation, but God could not have been any clearer on what will happen to the lost, and the translators of most versions give us a true translation of the above words. God could have used words that means separation from God in torment, eternal life in torment, deathless, but instead He used death, die, destruction, destroy and perish.
Robert Dozier gives us a true picture of the way many try to prove these scholars wrong. He says, "The scripture in Mt. 10:28 is translated 'destroy.' But I don't want to believe that, as it contradicts my preconceived ideas. So I go to the lexicon and find out if the translators and translation is correct. I know little of the language compared to the translators, but I do find out that the Greek word translated 'destroy' is defined by the lexicons. The first definition is, 'to destroy' but that won't work for me. If I accept that, the translators are correct. Also included in the definition is 'to put out of the way entirely.' That is just not precise enough. Next is 'abolish' but that is not much better than destroy. Then, 'put an end to.' Nope, that may be the worst yet! Then 'ruin.' Finally! Something I can work with! I am not saying that James or others are consciously or deliberately trying to avoid the meaning of words or discredit the scholarship of the translations, but if we start out with a false premise and then try to defend it, we can find ourselves making some unreasonable arguments and claims along the way. That all the translators made huge blunders over and over regarding the end of the lost is such a claim. The men who wrote the lexicons rendered it 'destroy' in our Bible, and defined it the same way, but if that won't fit our idea, we must point out their error and be thankful that they left us one word in a lexicon to grasp at. While the word 'annihilation' is not in our scripture, the words translated are much closer to it than they are to 'never ending conscious torment.' that's for sure...Even the rendering of 'ruined' doesn't help that much. It may neutralize that text from being one that favors annihilation, but it sure doesn't teach 'never ending conscious torment.'" Robert Dozier-James Johnson Debate on eternal punishment at: http://www.religiousdebates.com/
BUT, WHAT DO LEXICONS MEAN BY "RUINED"?
A book that is burned up is "ruined." As a book it does not exist anymore. It has been destroyed; the ashes are not the book.
A school teacher has a good reputation, then everyone finds that she is working at a house of prostitution at night. Her good reputation is "ruined." It is destroyed, it does not exist anymore.
“As one examines the many biblical examples of God’s dealings with the wicked, it will be quickly perceived that not one single time in all of recorded biblical teaching is the punishment for sin against God ever declared to be torture. The ultimate punishment, instead, is always declared to be death. Thus, if indeed God’s final punishment for the wicked is endless torture, as some maintain, it is a fate completely without biblical precedents. Nowhere in Scripture does God ever use torture as divine punishment for man. Not even once!” Al Maxey, Reflections, Issue