I've always had a problem with Matthew 25:46 (in that) "Eternal Punishment" seems to entail punishment that is tangible. A non-existing object can't be punished or tormented, can it? Marcus

Hello Marcus!

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life. Matthew 25:46

Now, I really haven't put a whole lot of time into studying these passages in regards to eternal punishment (at least, not for many years), but I am quite convinced we have been so indoctrinated, willingly or unwillingly, by foreign viewpoints that have demanded an underlying logic we often assume to be a fixed Biblical rule. I'm referring to the very concept of "eternal".

Consider, how is it that Jude could have ever stated that Sodom and Gomorrah stood as the EXAMPLE of eternal fire?

...just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire. Jude 7

We can play around with words and terms and concepts all we want in order to support a viewpoint, but it seems very clear that Jude, and therefore those to whom he wrote, had no problem understanding that "eternal" punishment didn't need the thing destroyed to remain in order for it to be eternal. In truth, it seems rather apparent that the utter destruction of those two cities by the fire rained down upon them makes it very clear as to what eternal destruction is. Sodom and Gomorrah were so done with that there was nothing left by which to mark their former existence except the smoldering ashes.

Who would ever try to make a case that the "eternal fire" by which S&G were destroyed continued past the finality of their destruction? Who would ever demand that S&G would HAVE TO be somehow PRESERVED in some fashion in order for their punishment to be considered "eternal"? It is the complete and utter destruction that marks the eternality of the punishment. The fact that there was absolutely nothing left of the former "glory" of those cities is what makes the punishment eternal. There was nothing left by which those cities could be rebuilt. Their glory was extinguished forever ... into eternity.

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life. Matthew 25:46

Now, just why is it we find the argument that says eternal punishment needs an eternal object so irrefutable? I know that it fit the logic of my viewpoints in times past, but it almost makes me laugh to realize how much noise has been made over this ... especially that which I used to make!! :)

We've had these pictures embedded into our heads coupled together with so-called "Biblical" teachings by which we have demanded that the only way God could eternally punish would be for Him to fashion indestructible bodies, complete with a fully-functioning consciousness, so that the punished would non-endingly experience and be totally conscious of unfathomable pain and suffering that would last forever and ever and ever and ever. You know, this kind of thinking seems to follow the intensity of man's judgment rather than God's, don't you think?

After all, isn't it the anger and rage of man that desires that those who offend him should experience unending suffering in order to appease HIS OWN sense of justice? Do we really think it was said to leave the judgment of another up to God because God could do a much better job of making the offender pay since He was going to make the punishment be experienced forever?

No, no, the judgment of God was laid upon Jesus Christ, and in him that former existence is done away. That which is born of the flesh is constantly being revealed as passing away ... and its remembrance shall be no more. The truth is that we have so long read that verse according to the judgment of man that we can't see how plain and simple it really is.

Love, Jim