Here is the quote from Malachi 4:

“For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble. The day that is coming shall set them ablaze, says the Lord of hosts, so that it will leave them neither root nor branch. 2 But for you who fear my name, the sun of righteousness shall rise with healing in its wings. You shall go out leaping like calves from the stall. 3 And you shall tread down the wicked, for they will be ashes under the soles of your feet, on the day when I act, says the Lord of hosts.”

I don’t know what could be a clearer statement than this.

Stan

Stan,

In my view, Harold Camping is not a respectable person because he has set dates for Christ’s return in the past and has now set yet another date about three years from now.  His radio programs are very depressing to listen to as well. Truly, Camping’s theology has proven to be the most extreme and unorthodox in religious circles today.  My wife refers to him as an Adventist whenever she hears any of his messages.  His radio programs seem to always major in OT passages.  He further insists that the gospel or church age is past.  It is unwise to seek validaton of any doctrine from a person with so many widely-known false beliefs.

Dennis Fischer

PS:  For the precise, false teachings of Harold Camping, simply log unto http://www.equip.org and enter the name of “Harold Camping” in the search box.

Dennis Fischer

Stan,

The following commentary on Malachi 4:1-3 is very helpful:

the day is coming The first three verses continue the thought of the closing verses of the previous chapter, elaborating on God’s punishment of the wicked and His deliverance of the godly (cf. 3:1-5).  This eschatological reference to the Day of the Lord (cf. Is. 13:6;Joel 2:11, 31; Zeph. 1:14) is injected four times into the prophet’s final words (3:17; 4:1, 3, 5).  It anticipated the return of the Lord Jesus in judgment (cf. Rev. 19:11-21).

burning like an oven Adding to the imagery of a refining fire (3:2), Malachi spoke of God’s judgments as a destructive fire that swiftly and totally consumes with excessive heat (cf. with the proud of 3:15).  The destruction of the roots, normally protected by their subsurface location, provides a vivid, proverbial picture of its totality.  All who refuse to repent will be cast into the fire of hell (cf. Rev. 20:11-15).

ashes under...your feet The destruction of the wicked is appreciated by those who suffered at their hand.  Ashes were often poured on foot trails to provide a more solid pathway during wet weather.  Here, the wicked are compared to ashes, which the righteous will tread down as a result of the fire of God’s judgment (cf. v. 1).  The prophet desires, as should all believers, that there be far-reaching repentance, but if not, destruction of the impenitent is inescapable.  [Excerpts from The MacArthur Bible Commentary, p. 1087]

These Malachi passages should not be taken literally as Malachi 4:5 further validates with Elijah’s expected coming before the first coming of Christ.  I don’t know of any respectable Bible scholar who would insist that Elijah literally returned.  Context should be king when reaching a theological conclusion.  Rather, this was most likely an Elijah-like person as John the Baptist.

Dennis Fischer

I have serious concerns regarding eternal punishment/suffering for sinners.  In some respects it is more a visceral response than scriptural.

Mankind is immortal?
This concept grants all who were born were destined to live eternally, either in heaven or hell, it also grants that sin itself will continue to exist. Concluding that all mankind is destined to live forever, the reward for believers can’t be eternal life itself but instead must be one that determines the location of that life. 

Sin and sinners coexisting with God - eternally? 
The concept of this festering sore (a literal eternal hell) existing eternally in God’s righteous kingdom is beyond my comprehension.

Rev 20:7 When the thousand years are completed, Satan will be released from his prison, 8 and will come out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together for the war; the number of them is like the sand of the seashore. 9 And they came up on the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, and fire came down from heaven and devoured them.

‘by fire, to devour, i.e. to utterly consume, destroy’

JONVIL

Stan Ermshar - 12 July 2008 10:26 PM

Thanks Chiapet for your observations on this topic. I agree with your understanding of this doctrine. I also agree that it should not be a dividing point among Christians.

Stan,

We may agreeable disagree on this point, and I will have no reason to reply to your post, but there is something that troubles me regarding what you’re saying.

Stan Ermshar - 12 July 2008 10:26 PM

I just differ from my good brother Dennis on this topic. We had a stimulating discussion on this topic on another former SDA forum, and it is certainly not my intention to get into this argument again,

I will not enter too into this argument again. I’ll point to something that I think is problematic not in the construction of the argument itself, but regarding the question if the disagreement is stated in an agreeable way.

Stan Ermshar - 12 July 2008 10:26 PM

There are many who agree with Stott and Hughes, but because of their prominent positions, they will not admit that the traditional view of eternal torment might be wrong.

This is going beyond an agreeable disagreement, you’re questioning the integrity of “many” of the reformed tradition. You may have your personal reasons to do so, but you cannot say “That should not be a point of division between christians” and at the same time rising questions regarding their integrity.

Stan Ermshar - 12 July 2008 10:26 PM

The great Bible translator John Weymouth was amazed that the very simple words of scripture which affirm the destruction of the unsaved could somehow be twisted into saying that death means eternal torment.

Again, your cannot pretend that this subject should not be a point of disagreement between Christians when you imply that they are involved in twisting the meaning of biblical texts. You are entitled to affirm that we are misunderstanding the biblical texts, but saying that we are “somehow twisting” implies an accusation that we cannot take lightly. ‘

Stan Ermshar - 12 July 2008 10:26 PM

I am very concerned that too many former Adventists think that every doctrine that SDAs teach is wrong, and they have automatically rejected a doctrine of a just punishment and almost automatically accept the traditional view. I was certainly guilty of doing this, but I had to change my view after studying the Biblical evidence.

Believing that every doctrine that SDAs teach is wrong does not automatically suppose that we first decided that SDAs are 100% wrong and after rejected annihilationism on this basis. Rather this annihilationist position was one of the last teachings of SDAs abandoned, as many formers confess. After we abandoned this teaching, we came to the conclusion that ALL SDAs specific, peculiar teachings are wrong, not the other way around.

Again, your disagreement goes beyond the agreeable attitude and extend to ad hominem arguments, suggesting that formers who think that all the SDAs teachings are wrong do this from an “all of nothing” attitude, which plays very well in the criticism we formers encounter at every step from adventists, namely that we are extremists and we are not reasonable people. I remember the last words of guibox on this forum, when he suggested that I’m bigoted, if I’m remembering correctly. Anyway, I have enough wounds from members from my former church, now I realize that I rather should be careful and protect myself from “friendly fire”.

Gabriel

Jonvil,

In Revelation 19:20 we read that the beast and the false prophet were “thrown alive into the lake of fire which burns with brimestone.” One thousand years later, according to Revelation 20:10, the “devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are also [notice the present tense]; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.” Notice that the beast and the false prophet were still in the lake of fire after one thousand long years.  This certainly doesn’t sound like annihilation.  Moreover, you conveniently failed to cite Rev. 20:10 where it says “...and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.” Could human language get any clearer?

Think about it!  Since man was uniquely fashioned into the divine image of his Creator, it would do violence to His divine nature to obliterate the crowning jewels of His creation who reflect the image of God Himself.  Furthermore, hell is eternal in duration because the unconfessed and unforgiven sins of the lost are forever before the Father.  Indeed, our sovereign and holy God makes a big deal about sin with its innate rebellion against Him.  If such a transitory fate (as the momentary, quick-fix of annihilation) were true, many would be justified to enter into a hedonistic lifestyle and just eat, drink, and be merry today and quickly be extinguished tomorrow (Ecclesiastes 8:15).  As you rightly indicated, many annihilationists arrive at their conclusion based primarily upon human sentiment instead of from biblical teaching.  Man likes to believe what he prefers to be true.

Annihilation does not constitute the ultimate punishment. Rather, annilation would constitute the end of punishment.  The Reformed theologian, Dr. Robert Peterson, reminds us that “For believer’s death means being ‘away from the body and at home with the Lord’ (2 Cor. 5:8). That is why He promised the penitent thief, ‘Today you will be with Me in paradise’ (Luke 23:43). That is why Paul described departing the body to be with Christ as ‘better by far’ than remaining in the body (Phil. 1:23). And that is why Scripture speaks of deceased human beings as souls ‘under the altar’ (Rev. 6:9) and as the ‘spirits of righteous men made perfect’ (Heb. 12:23).” [Excerpt from Two Views of Hell, page 171]

Interestingly and strikingly, the Scriptures portray how the wicked will actually beg for annihilation and/or suicide in asking for the rocks and mountains to fall on them to hide them “from the wrath of the Lamb” (Rev. 6:16).  However, in spite of their frantic pleas, suicide and/or annihilation will not be permitted to substitute for their ”eternal punishment” (Matthew 25:46). It is important to remember that one must be alive to be punished.  Jailors are often required to put suicide-prone inmates on a special watch to prevent any quick-fix solutions to their problems. Understandably, from a purely human perspective, violent criminals often prefer instant death instead of a drawn-out, lifetime incarceration.  The worst feature of hell is its duration.  As life continues, hell only gets worse while heaven only gets better.

Our Adventist friends frequently like to tell us, “My god is too kind and loving.  He would never eternally torment the ungodly.” The sovereignty of God is not considered when something doesn’t mesh with their esoteric views.  By creating the own god, they can conveniently sidestep anything that counters their theological comfort zone.  In closing, let us review the depressing plight of the devil.  God has placed Satan and his angels under conscious torment ever since He cast them out of heaven.  And note this, Satan and his hosts never have a good day.  They exist without any hope of regaining their original state.  Their constant anguish and despair is merely a foretaste of the reality of hell they will soon experience forever.  Is God “too kind and loving” to allow Satan and his angels to suffer ever since their expulsion from heaven?  If the SDA supposals are true, Satan should have been annihilated or obliterated immediately after his rebellion in heaven, because God is “too kind and loving” to cause him to endure such intense anguish and discomfort for thousands, perhaps millions, of years already.

Let us remember the Adventist depiction of God, being “too kind and loving,” who would never allow Satan and his evil angels to endure such a severe, constant suffering all these many, many years (with evil angels in “pits of darkness").  I can well envision my SDA friends asking, “How could a kind and loving God inflict such horrific punishment upon a former leader in heaven?” Furthermore, they would likely add, “Only a tyrant would do such an awful thing.  I would never worship nor respect a God like that!” Humanly speaking, God’s ways may not always seem right or appealing to us.  On the other hand, why not just believe what He says?  Which view of punishment do you think Satan wants us to believe in--eternal agony in hell or the momentary quick-fix of annihilation after living a profane life (try to be objective)?

Dennis Fischer

Dennis,

I agree with you on Harold Camping’s many errors, but he is also right about many things. What I love about Family Radio is their worshipful hymns. What does Sylvia think about the hymns?

However, my point is that he was one of the most thoroughly convinced proponents of eternal hell--even believeing babies and infants who are non-elect will suffer eternal torment, and Dennis, unless you have changed your position on this, you have held this view at least recently. This is where the traditional view of hell breaks down totally. Because, logically babies are just as much born in sin and need a savior as much as adults. But why have so many tried to skirt this issue by making a separate category for babies? Because a doctrine that says babies will suffer eternal torment has absolutely NO BASIS in scripture, and does not fit any model of a just and loving heavenly Father. And what about so many in distant lands and terror stricken areas, where so many die without hearing the gospel? Are these folks subject to eternal torment in hell? 

There are enough texts on both sides of this issue that the proponents of either position will point too, but I believe when all the texts on the subject are examined, the evidence clearly points to annihilation, and it fits best with any rational view of justice.

I frankly could not accept the Calvinistic view of salvation if eternal torment is true. This would mean that billions of people who were not elect have no way of changing their position or excaping such a dreadful fate. How terrible it would be to be born into this world as one of the non-elect.

I am more convinced now than ever of the Calvinistic or Reformed teaching on salvation, and it makes perfect sense knowing that God has the right to choose whom he will to save and regenerate. But, when I used to hold the view of eternal torment, this Reformed teaching was very difficult for me, even though I was convinced that it was true.

After studying the Bible on this topic for six months, and reading NON-ADVENTIST books on those who hold to the annihilation view, I have become thoroughly convinced that God does not predestine billions of non-elect sinners to suffer in the fires of eternal torment forever without end

The passages in Revelation are very symbolic and fire is used as a term for judgment. There are good explanations of these texts which I have referred to before. The epistles do not cleaarly teach a doctrine of eternal torment.  2 Peter 3 is very interesting especially when the ESV translation is used.

I agree with Dennis that Harold Camping is not reliable in many areas, but his change of view on this topic parallels others who are also rethinking this issue

I would just ask those who believe in eternal torment to at least read carefully excerpts from Phillip Hughes book which I posted at the very beginning of this thread and compare scripture with scripture. In your heart of hearts do you really believe that a just and merciful God would torment finite humans for eternity?

Also read John Stott as he is another very credible voice who now believes the annihilation viewpoint.

Sorry Gabriel if my post came off as ad hominem. I reread my post, and I still don’t think the spirit of the post was meant to be ad hominem , and I was not referring to you or Dennis, as I know you have studied these positions carefully.

It is interesting that both Calvinism and eternal torment are doctrines that will always generate a lot of arguments and disagreements.

Hey, at least this discussion woke up the blog as it had been quiet for a few days (smiley)

Stan

Stan,

Thank you for your comments.  Since nobody is born innocent or without having the condition of original sin, we all deserve death.  If God didn’t save even one person, he would still be a wonderful, great, and just God.  The fact that God even elects anyone makes his grace even more amazing.  The sober truth is that God doesn’t owe us anything.  I don’t see any difficulty for God in electing the heathen or infants who have never heard the gospel.  In both cases, God sovereignly chooses those he wants to adopt as members of his wonderful family.  Certainly, babies are not more righteous nor more worthy of salvation than the adult heathen. 

It is important to remember that God doesn’t choose anyone based upon any merit, location, or specialness on their part.  In the case of Jacob and Esau, God certainly didn’t have any difficulty in excluding one and including the other before they were even born.  Thus, this indicates that God doesn’t elect all infants just because they are cute and tiny.  We have no knowledge of how our sovereign God elects some and not others.  If we could fully explain the ways of God, he would not be worthy of our praise and worship.  Indeed, we serve an awesome and holy God.  Salvation is from the Lord alone!

Dennis Fischer

Dennis - 14 July 2008 07:01 AM

Stan,

Thank you for your comments.  Since nobody is born innocent or without having the condition of original sin, we all deserve death.  If God didn’t save even one person, he would still be a wonderful, great, and just God.  The fact that God even elects anyone makes his grace even more amazing.  The sober truth is that God doesn’t owe us anything.  I don’t see any difficulty for God in electing the heathen or infants who have never heard the gospel.  In both cases, God sovereignly chooses those he wants to adopt as members of his wonderful family.  Certainly, babies are not more righteous nor more worthy of salvation than the adult heathen. 

It is important to remember that God doesn’t choose anyone based upon any merit, location, or specialness on their part.  In the case of Jacob and Esau, God certainly didn’t have any difficulty in excluding one and including the other before they were even born.  Thus, this indicates that God doesn’t elect all infants just because they are cute and tiny.  We have no knowledge of how our sovereign God elects some and not others.  If we could fully explain the ways of God, he would not be worthy of our praise and worship.  Indeed, we serve an awesome and holy God.  Salvation is from the Lord alone!

Dennis Fischer

I agree 100% that God has NO OBLIGATION to save anyone. It is impossible for anyone to be saved apart from the sole regenerating work of the Holy Spirit by His glorious sovereign grace.

But I would also ask the question:  Does God have an obligation to send all unregenerate non-elect sinners to a miserable existence in hell for the endless ages of eternity?  I understand perfectly that original sin condemns EVERYONE to death as Romans 6:23 says. But the wages of sin being death is certain, but the debate would be:  Does “death” have to mean eternal suffering for the eons of all eternity?  How unfortunate it is to be born into a culture where a person will not hear the gospel and come to faith? 

But make no mistake. My personal belief in this area does not take away from the doctrine of the terrible wrath of God. Unregenerate sinners will have to answer to God and be judged appropriately according to their deeds. According to Revelation 21, they will have their part in the lake of fire according to their works. This is the second death

Stan

Stan,

Being born into some remote, backward culture does not prevent God from choosing them as His elect as the Bible repeatedly verifies.  The gospel is to be preached to every corner of the earth, as a general call and witness, so that those suffering in hell can never say they didn’t have an opportunity to respond.  Even nature itself, God’s second book, reveals the glory of its Creator.  God has never been timid nor reluctant about going on individual rescue missions.  In His sovereign fairness, God has degrees of reward for the both the righteous and unrighteous.  We can trust fully assured that nobody will be treated unfairly in the judgment.  Those who are planning to put God on trial for his possible unfairness will not be entering the holy city with their demand for an audit.  The Cross fully vindicated our loving and merciful God.

For example, think of the plight of Satan and his evil angels who have suffered intensely in “pits of darkness” for thousands, perhaps millions of years already.  They NEVER ever have a good day.  Thomas Aquinas said it well:  “A sin against God is infinite; the higher the person against whom it is committed, the graver the sin and God is of infinite greatness.  Therefore, an infinite punishment is deserved for a sin committed against him.” [Summa Theologiae; Blackfriars ed., 1a2ae.87.4] God considers all sin as a most serious matter.  Hell is eternal because the unconfessed and unforgiven sins of the wicked are forever before the Father.  Sin separates us from God.  Truly, we are in desperate need of a Savior and Substitute.

Dennis Fischer

In a non-Jewish context, hell only exists in Christianity. Did you know that NO OTHER major religion in the world preaches that hell lasts forever?  Even the Muslims, like our Adventist and Jehovah’s Witness friends, teach that we will be in a fire that burns us up until we are nothing but ashes (annihilation).  The idea of annihilation makes their uncertainty less terrifying.  Therefore, there can be NO endless suffering in Islam.  Look at other major world religions (e.g., Buddhism, Hinduism, Shintoism, Sikhism, Zorastrianism, etc.) We cannot suffer forever they insist. 

Can anyone mention any other religions, and say whether there is an endless punishment?  There will be none.  Why?  Because all the other religions are based on the philosophy of man; so in man’s own eyes, he is not bad enough to enter a place of suffering forever.  Again, how can Christianity have the nerve to say what other religions do not?  Every other religion lets the human race get out of HELL.  Even our Catholic friends invented purgatory, which means a temporary place of suffering.  Do you know that it is NOT a CHRISTIAN teaching, if it does not include eternal suffering--suffering that goes on forever and ever?

Augustine declared, “There is no greater or worse death than when death never dies.” Jesus said, “Depart from me, ye cursed, into EVERLASTING FIRE, prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41).  The apostle Peter affirms the fact that evil angels have been imprisoned in ”pits of darkness” for thousands, perhaps millions of years already.  (see 2 Peter 2:4). Truly, Satan and his angels NEVER have a good day.  Hell only gets worse while heaven only gets better.  Many are asking, “How could a kind and loving God torment a former leader (and his angels) in heaven all these many, many years already?” Some would likely reply, “Only a tyrant would do such an awful thing.” The apostle John repeatedly affirms that the wicked will be forever tormented with “no rest day nor night” (Rev. 14:11; 20:10).

Jesus took hell so serious--He could say without the slightest hesitation--to remove your eye, cut off your hand or foot, if that would keep you out of hell!  It is humanly impossible to comprehend the biblical description of hell.  Nothing on earth can compare with it.  All who enter--abandon all hope!  The horror of hell--for even one second is unbearable--but FOREVER!  There is not even one verse in Scripture that offers any hope to those in hell!  The rich man in hell in Luke 16 never even asks to get out--he knew there was no way out!

Many people turn to a different religion at this point.  But what other religion offers them eternal life?  Many people do NOT want to be threatened.  Any religion will do, because no other religion has a hell! The thought of hell is both scary and politically-incorrect.  After all, many of our friends tell us that man is not really bad enough to deserve death--eternal separation from God.  Many agree that man is merely sick in sin, but certainly not dead in sin.  Moreover, our Arminian friends insist that man is the captain of his eternal destiny.  None of the other religions can offer you ETERNAL LIFE, so NONE of the other religions can make the following threat:  “How shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation?” (Heb. 2:3). Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true.

Dennis Fischer