M1Buckeye said:

---

Zobel said:

---

how about instead of good material, you just answer the question?

---

Serious question. Are you interested in sharing and learning about God or are you just trying to win an argument?

---

Umm, I think that questioned could be turned back to you as well. From this thread, it seems like you're not addressing a couple of the questions but are challenging everyone to disregard 1000+ years of theology that wasn't debated for your interpretation of scripture. Sure we all wish everyone will be saved and end up in Heaven. God wants this…but if some people don't want him, that is the system he set up. He gives everyone as much opportunity to come to him. To know who He is and reject him is a choice. He still loves us. I'm not sure about ECT personally but I do believe there will be those separated from Gods presence. Besides, we won't have bodies and nervous systems to feel real fire to maybe the absence of Him is the real torture

AgLiving06 said:

---

I'm not sure I would agree that Jonah is a good example for this discussion.

First, we know that until the end Jonah was angry and wished to die out of anger. Further God didn't just force Jonah to do it...He just made it really inconvenient to ignore Him and we absolutely see Jonah turn away from God multiple times.

But more importantly, Nineveh does repent and stopped turning away from God.

Jonah 3:6-10

"6 The word reached the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, removed his robe, covered himself with sackcloth, and sat in ashes. 7 And he issued a proclamation and published through Nineveh, "By the decree of the king and his nobles: Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste anything. Let them not feed or drink water, 8 but let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and let them call out mightily to God. Let everyone turn from his evil way and from the violence that is in his hands. 9 Who knows? God may turn and relent and turn from his fierce anger, so that we may not perish."
10 When God saw what they did, how they turned from their evil way, God relented of the disaster that he had said he would do to them, and he did not do it. "

So if the argument is that God utilizes multiple avenues to try and keep everybody in the faith, then yes and amen...but from Jonah we see that God doesn't just "save" the unrepentant. They come back to God and are saved.

---

Well said

BluHorseShu said:

---

M1Buckeye said:

---

Zobel said:

---

how about instead of good material, you just answer the question?

---

Serious question. Are you interested in sharing and learning about God or are you just trying to win an argument?

---

Umm, I think that questioned could be turned back to you as well. From this thread, it seems like you're not addressing a couple of the questions but are challenging everyone to disregard 1000+ years of theology that wasn't debated for your interpretation of scripture. Sure we all wish everyone will be saved and end up in Heaven. God wants this…but if some people don't want him, that is the system he set up. He gives everyone as much opportunity to come to him. To know who He is and reject him is a choice. He still loves us. I'm not sure about ECT personally but I do believe there will be those separated from Gods presence. Besides, we won't have bodies and nervous systems to feel real fire to maybe the absence of Him is the real torture

---

agree with everything until the ending. We will have resurrected bodies at some point.

So y'all are saying it is all free will and every man has the choice to accept or reject Jesus as their Savior?

What about people who have never heard of Jesus? Or are born in Muslim countries? Do you have to consciously reject Jesus to go to hell? And I guess y'all are saying that every living person has been given that choice? Supernaturally? And I know God can do anything, so I sure hope that is true.

I know in Romans Paul states that there is no excuse because of the signs of creation, etc.

But I sure hope and pray that all will be saved.

The Banned said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

M1Buckeye said:

---

Zobel said:

---

how about instead of good material, you just answer the question?

---

Serious question. Are you interested in sharing and learning about God or are you just trying to win an argument?

---

Umm, I think that questioned could be turned back to you as well. From this thread, it seems like you're not addressing a couple of the questions but are challenging everyone to disregard 1000+ years of theology that wasn't debated for your interpretation of scripture. Sure we all wish everyone will be saved and end up in Heaven. God wants this…but if some people don't want him, that is the system he set up. He gives everyone as much opportunity to come to him. To know who He is and reject him is a choice. He still loves us. I'm not sure about ECT personally but I do believe there will be those separated from Gods presence. Besides, we won't have bodies and nervous systems to feel real fire to maybe the absence of Him is the real torture

---

agree with everything until the ending. We will have resurrected bodies at some point.

---

Yes, but heavenly in nature

dermdoc said:

---

So y'all are saying it is all free will and every man has the choice to accept or reject Jesus as their Savior?

What about people who have never heard of Jesus? Or are born in Muslim countries? Do you have to consciously reject Jesus to go to hell? And I guess y'all are saying that every living person has been given that choice? Supernaturally? And I know God can do anything, so I sure hope that is true.

I know in Romans Paul states that there is no excuse because of the signs of creation, etc.

But I sure hope and pray that all will be saved.

---

I think scripture isn't definitive on this , but many, including myself, believe God does not hold them accountable if they have never heard the Gospel. Kind of like babies who die.

BluHorseShu said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

So y'all are saying it is all free will and every man has the choice to accept or reject Jesus as their Savior?

What about people who have never heard of Jesus? Or are born in Muslim countries? Do you have to consciously reject Jesus to go to hell? And I guess y'all are saying that every living person has been given that choice? Supernaturally? And I know God can do anything, so I sure hope that is true.

I know in Romans Paul states that there is no excuse because of the signs of creation, etc.

But I sure hope and pray that all will be saved.

---

I think scripture isn't definitive on this , but many, including myself, believe God does not hold them accountable if they have never heard the Gospel. Kind of like babies who die.

---

Augustine disagrees with you

dermdoc said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

So y'all are saying it is all free will and every man has the choice to accept or reject Jesus as their Savior?

What about people who have never heard of Jesus? Or are born in Muslim countries? Do you have to consciously reject Jesus to go to hell? And I guess y'all are saying that every living person has been given that choice? Supernaturally? And I know God can do anything, so I sure hope that is true.

I know in Romans Paul states that there is no excuse because of the signs of creation, etc.

But I sure hope and pray that all will be saved.

---

I think scripture isn't definitive on this , but many, including myself, believe God does not hold them accountable if they have never heard the Gospel. Kind of like babies who die.

---

Augustine disagrees with you

---

Augustine also didn't have the authority to dogmatically define his view as absolute truth. We look at the body of work of the church fathers and the Magesterium (meaning all of the bishops and the pope) seeks the Holy Spirit for answers. His views on limbo, for example, were never accepted as formal doctrine.

dermdoc said:

---

So y'all are saying it is all free will and every man has the choice to accept or reject Jesus as their Savior?

What about people who have never heard of Jesus? Or are born in Muslim countries? Do you have to consciously reject Jesus to go to hell? And I guess y'all are saying that every living person has been given that choice? Supernaturally? And I know God can do anything, so I sure hope that is true.

I know in Romans Paul states that there is no excuse because of the signs of creation, etc.

But I sure hope and pray that all will be saved.

---

I don't think it's right to say that we have "the choice to accept Jesus." That decision was God's alone in His desire to save all of mankind.

You said previously that "I do not think stealing, killing, committing adultery, coveting, etc. brings happiness" and I absolutely agree with that. The norm in our life would be to follow God because He wrote His law on our hearts. So our own choice is to reject that and pursue the flesh.

I think to your next section, we don't know. I hope and pray there's a difference between someone who consciously rejects Jesus and those who don't. Remember what Jesus final command was before he ascended...to "go and make disciples of all nations..." and we should do that.

Thanks for the thoughtful replies.

I do not think some of these questions will be answered until we are with the Lord.

I am going to continue to hope and pray for the salvation of all. And share the Gospel when I can.

dermdoc said:

---

Thanks for the thoughtful replies.

I do not think some of these questions will be answered until we are with the Lord.

I am going to continue to hope and pray for the salvation of all. And share the Gospel when I can.

---

On this I hope we can all agree

This may have been covered in the 6 pages but jumping in for the initial post...


Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. Romans 5:9

"Eternal" Punishment (Matthew 25:46) Is NOT Found In The Greek New Testament.
By Tony Nungesser and Gary Amirault

The entire concept of eternal or everlasting punishment hinges primarily on a single verse of Scripture-- Matthew 25:46. This is the only place in the entire Bible where we find these two words together AND only in some Bibles. There are over a dozen English translations which do NOT contain the concept of "eternal punishment" on ANY of their pages, NOR the pagan concept of Hell.

The Greek form for "everlasting punishment" in Matthew 25:46 is "kolasin aionion." Kolasin is a noun in the accusative form, singular voice, feminine gender and means "punishment, chastening, correction, to cut-off as in pruning a tree to bare more fruit." "Aionion" is the adjective form of "aion," in the singular form and means "pertaining to an eon or age, an indeterminate period of time." (Note: the two words in many, not all translations become reversed when bringing the Greek into English, that is, "kolasin aionion" literally punishment everlasting is reversed to everlasting punishment so as to make better sense in English.)

"Aionion," as shown above, is the singular form of the adjective of the Greek noun "aion." Many people unfamiliar with the Greek do not realize that the endings of the same word change (inflection) to indicate its mood, case, gender, etc. Therefore, "aionion" may appear with different endings. "Aionion, aioniou, aionios," for example, are all different inflections of the adjective form of the noun "aion."

The noun "aion" in Greek literature has always meant "an indeterminate period of time. It could be as short as the time Jonah spent in the belly of a fish (three days or nights even though the KJV has him in the "belly of Hell" "forever," obviously a mistranslation; see Jonah 2:2, 2:6.), the length of a man's life, or as long as an age.

The Bible speaks of at least 5 "aions" and perhaps many more. If there were "aions" in the past, then aions must have an end. The New Testament writers spoke of "the present wicked aion" which ended during that very generation. Obviously, it was followed by another "aion"-- the "aion" in which we presently live. If there are "aions" to come, it must mean that this one we live in will also end.

There is a verse which says "the consummation of the aions" proving that each "aion" ends. So how can they be eternal?
There is "the coming eon" (Matt.10:30, Luke 18:30
There is "the present wicked eon" (Gal.1:4)
There is "the oncoming eons (future)(Eph.2:7)
There is "the conclusion of the eon (present) (Mt.13:39,40)
There is "the secret concealed from the eons (past) (Eph.3:9)

Plainly, the Greek word "aion" transliterated "eon" cannot mean "eternal." A study into the Greek of the Biblical period and before will bear this out.

"Aionion" is the adjective of the noun "aion."

Since grammar rules mandate an adjective CANNOT take on a greater force than its noun form, it is evident that "aionion" in any of its adjective forms (ios, ou, on) CANNOT possible mean "everlasting" or anything remotely indicating eternity or unending time.

For example, "hourly" cannot mean "pertaining to days, weeks, months, or years. The word MUST mean "pertaining to an hour." Therefore, "aionion," the adjective form of the noun "aion" which clearly means a period of indeterminate TIME, CANNOT mean, "forever and ever, eternal, everlasting, eternity, etc." or other words which connote timelessness or unending ages.

Therefore, those many Bibles which do NOT contain the teaching of everlasting punishment or Hell are true to the original languages of Greek and Hebrew. Those which teach everlasting punishment or Hell are false. Scholars are just as easily subjected to the "traditions of the elders" as the rest of us. It's time to let the original Greek and Hebrew languages of the Bible break down the traditions of men.

Here is a list of Bibles which have taken major steps towards correcting many of the corruptions found in the King James Bible, NIV, NASB, NRSV, Amplified, as well as other leading selling Bibles:

Some of them are published by leading Evangelical Christian publishers like Baker Book House, Kregal and Eerdman's Publishing. Here's a partial list of some English Bible translations that do NOT contain Hell nor the concept of everlasting punishment: Rotherham's Emphasized Bible (Kregal Publishers), Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible (Baker Book House Publishers; Robert Young is author of the famous Young's Concordance), Concordant Literal Translation of the N.T. (Concordant Publishing Concern), Scarlet's New Testament (Nathaniel Scarlett, 1798), The New Testament (Abner Kneeland, 1823) Emphatic Diaglott (Greek/English Interlinear), The New Covenant (J.W. Hanson, 1884), New Testament in Modern Speech (Weymouth, 1910), The Restoration of Original Sacred Name Bible (1976), The Twentieth Century New Testament (1900), The New Testament of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Anointed (James L. Tomanek)1958), The Western New Testament (1926), The New Testament, a Translation (Rev. Edgar Lewis Clementson, 1938), The People's New Testament (Arthur Overbury), The New Testament, A New Translation based upon the Oldest Manuscripts (Johannes Greber, 1980) Jonathan Mitchell New Testament (2009) Far Above All New Testament (2009).

There are other translations like the Companion Bible King James Version, American Standard Version (1901), the Newberry Reference Bible (Still published by Kregal Publications), and the Riverside New Testament by Ballantine (1934) which contain footnotes, marginal readings and appendages which point out that several key Greek and Hebrew words have been MIStranslated by such Bible versions as the King James Bible.

For much more information on how this word as well as words have been mistranslated in many leading selling Bibles, write to the address below or visit our internet site. http://www.tentmaker.org

Aionion in that verse is an adjective not a noun - accusative feminine singular adjective.

The above analysis is simply incorrect. The word is often used to connote the eternal, particularly in classical literature. Here's a pretty good review:
https://stempublishing.com/authors/darby/DOCTRINE/31003E.html


And you STILL haven't answered the question. The same exact word is used a second time in that sentence to describe the life of the righteous. Is the life of the righteous not eternal?

I have you two other examples using the same word, one to describe God, and one to describe the salvation of Christ. Are these also not eternal?

Here's a better way to think. Even if it is not properly "eternal" but only for the duration of the age to come… when will the age to come end?

Here's a fun verse to parse:

We are not looking at what is being seen, but at what is not being seen. For what is being seen is temporary, but what is not being seen is eternal (aionia).

If aionia cannot be contrasted with temporary, this verse is nonsense.

Is Sodom still burning today? The ESV translation says it is.

Jude 7
English Standard Version
7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire,[a] serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of ETERNAL fire.

Here's the YLT translation:

Jude 7
Young's Literal Translation
7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them, in like manner to these, having given themselves to *****dom, and gone after other flesh, have been set before -- an example, of fire age-during, justice suffering.

Yeah I mean it's pretty obvious here you can't actually answer the question, so I suppose there is an impasse.

Zobel said:

---

Here's a fun verse to parse:

We are not looking at what is being seen, but at what is not being seen. For what is being seen is temporary, but what is not being seen is eternal (aionia).

If aionia cannot be contrasted with temporary, this verse is nonsense.

---

Here is the correct translation:

2 Corinthians 4:18
Young's Literal Translation
18 we not looking to the things seen, but to the things not seen; for the things seen [are] temporary, but the things not seen [are] age-during.

Zobel said:

---

Aionion in that verse is an adjective not a noun - accusative feminine singular adjective.

The above analysis is simply incorrect. The word is often used to connote the eternal, particularly in classical literature. Here's a pretty good review:
https://stempublishing.com/authors/darby/DOCTRINE/31003E.html


And you STILL haven't answered the question. The same exact word is used a second time in that sentence to describe the life of the righteous. Is the life of the righteous not eternal?

I have you two other examples using the same word, one to describe God, and one to describe the salvation of Christ. Are these also not eternal?

Here's a better way to think. Even if it is not properly "eternal" but only for the duration of the age to come… when will the age to come end?

---

Agreed.

From the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament:

D. The Personification of Ain. Important in Hellenistic syncretism, the personification of Ain is absent from the NT (except for a suggestion in Eph. 2:2).
ainios. An adjective meaning "eternal," and found in the LXX in Pss. 24; 77:5; Gen. 21:33, ainios in the NT is used 1. of God (Rom. 16:26), 2. of divine possessions and gifts (2 Cor. 4:18; Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 5:10; 1 Tim. 6:16; 2 Th. 2:16, and 3. of the eternal kingdom (2 Pet. 1:11), inheritance (Heb. 9:15), body (2 Cor. 5:1), and even judgment (Heb. 6:2, though cf. Mt. 18:8; 2 Th. 1:9, where the sense is perhaps "unceasing"). For a more temporal use, see Rom. 16:25; Phlm. 15.

Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich, and Geoffrey William Bromiley, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Abridged in One Volume (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 1985), 32.

A quick look at wikipedia for Young's Literal Translation points us to the following:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%27s_Literal_Translation

Quote:

---

Proponents of universal reconciliation point out that this has significant implications for soteriology and the problem of hell.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%27s_Literal_Translation#cite_note-7][7][/url] However, "age" and "age-enduring" imply indeterminacy which may be either timeless and atemporal or pertaining to an indefinite period of time, the former (but not the latter) meaning having been acquired by the words "eternity" and "eternal".

---

So even relying on YLT doesn't particularly help your case.

AgLiving06 said:

---

A quick look at wikipedia for Young's Literal Translation points us to the following:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%27s_Literal_Translation

Quote:

---

Proponents of universal reconciliation point out that this has significant implications for soteriology and the problem of hell.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%27s_Literal_Translation#cite_note-7][7][/url] However, "age" and "age-enduring" imply indeterminacy which may be either timeless and atemporal or pertaining to an indefinite period of time, the former (but not the latter) meaning having been acquired by the words "eternity" and "eternal".

---

So even relying on YLT doesn't particularly help your case.

---

Well, if people are sent to "Hell" FOREVER, then this verse is FALSE. How do you reconcile this contradiction?

2 Samuel 14:4 We must all die; we are like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again. But God will not take away life, and he devises means so that the banished one will not remain an outcast.

Aside from the fact that "age-during" is a horrible translation because it has no understandable meaning in English, you ignore the fact that the contrast here is between temporary things and non-temporary things.

Here is another example of the mistranslation found in most English translations which creates contradictions.

Luke 1:33 esv
and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.

The verse is speaking about Jesus and we know that Jesus will NOT rule the "house of Jacob" FOREVER.

M1Buckeye said:

---

Here is another example of the mistranslation found in most English translations which creates contradictions.

Luke 1:33 esv
and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.

The verse is speaking about Jesus and we know that Jesus will NOT rule the "house of Jacob" FOREVER.

---

If you were taking derm's track, I think we'd all be in agreement. We all want everyone to go to heaven/eternal life. It would be the ideal. Most of us will simply stop short of saying everyone WILL go to heaven/eternal life because that's impossible to backup by either scripture alone or scripture and tradition. At least not the way you are choosing to interpret it.

The Banned said:

---

M1Buckeye said:

---

Here is another example of the mistranslation found in most English translations which creates contradictions.

Luke 1:33 esv
and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.

The verse is speaking about Jesus and we know that Jesus will NOT rule the "house of Jacob" FOREVER.

---

If you were taking derm's track, I think we'd all be in agreement. We all want everyone to go to heaven/eternal life. It would be the ideal. Most of us will simply stop short of saying everyone WILL go to heaven/eternal life because that's impossible to backup by either scripture alone or scripture and tradition. At least not the way you are choosing to interpret it.

---

On the contrary my brother, the scriptures absolutely support the doctrine that ALL people will be with God in the end. That doesn't mean that some won't face punishment and correction for living evil lives but, in the end, ALL will be with God. Here's just one of many verses that support this doctrine.

Luke 3:6 and all flesh shall see the salvation of God

If all of this is a result of unfortunate translations in 1611 why do you think the guys who were fluent in the original language didn't read it the way you are now?

It does seem odd that M1 simultaneously claims:

"I don't accept teachings that have been developed AFTER the original scriptures were written."

Yet relies on a translation newer than even the Reformation...

M1Buckeye said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

A quick look at wikipedia for Young's Literal Translation points us to the following:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%27s_Literal_Translation

Quote:

---

Proponents of universal reconciliation point out that this has significant implications for soteriology and the problem of hell.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%27s_Literal_Translation#cite_note-7][7][/url] However, "age" and "age-enduring" imply indeterminacy which may be either timeless and atemporal or pertaining to an indefinite period of time, the former (but not the latter) meaning having been acquired by the words "eternity" and "eternal".

---

So even relying on YLT doesn't particularly help your case.

---

Well, if people are sent to "Hell" FOREVER, then this verse is FALSE. How do you reconcile this contradiction?

2 Samuel 14:4 We must all die; we are like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again. But God will not take away life, and he devises means so that the banished one will not remain an outcast.

---

What are you claiming is false or a contradiction?

AgLiving06 said:

---

M1Buckeye said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

A quick look at wikipedia for Young's Literal Translation points us to the following:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%27s_Literal_Translation

Quote:

---

Proponents of universal reconciliation point out that this has significant implications for soteriology and the problem of hell.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%27s_Literal_Translation#cite_note-7][7][/url] However, "age" and "age-enduring" imply indeterminacy which may be either timeless and atemporal or pertaining to an indefinite period of time, the former (but not the latter) meaning having been acquired by the words "eternity" and "eternal".

---

So even relying on YLT doesn't particularly help your case.

---

Well, if people are sent to "Hell" FOREVER, then this verse is FALSE. How do you reconcile this contradiction?

2 Samuel 14:4 We must all die; we are like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again. But God will not take away life, and he devises means so that the banished one will not remain an outcast.

---

What are you claiming is false or a contradiction?

---

If people are sent to a forever "Hell" then 2 Samuel 14:4 is FALSE.

2 Samuel 14:4 We must all die; we are like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again. But God will not take away life, and he devises means so that the banished one will not remain an outcast.

You don't think the context of that verse is relevant?

M1Buckeye said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

M1Buckeye said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

A quick look at wikipedia for Young's Literal Translation points us to the following:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%27s_Literal_Translation

Quote:

---

Proponents of universal reconciliation point out that this has significant implications for soteriology and the problem of hell.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%27s_Literal_Translation#cite_note-7][7][/url] However, "age" and "age-enduring" imply indeterminacy which may be either timeless and atemporal or pertaining to an indefinite period of time, the former (but not the latter) meaning having been acquired by the words "eternity" and "eternal".

---

So even relying on YLT doesn't particularly help your case.

---

Well, if people are sent to "Hell" FOREVER, then this verse is FALSE. How do you reconcile this contradiction?

2 Samuel 14:4 We must all die; we are like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again. But God will not take away life, and he devises means so that the banished one will not remain an outcast.

---

What are you claiming is false or a contradiction?

---

If people are sent to a forever "Hell" then 2 Samuel 14:4 is FALSE.

2 Samuel 14:4 We must all die; we are like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again. But God will not take away life, and he devises means so that the banished one will not remain an outcast.

---

Just a side note, it's 2 Samual 14:14. I assumed you just typoed it, but now suspect whoever you took it from typoed it and you aren't looking.

And as Zobel said, context does actually matter. Proof texting is bad when you take something out of context is bad and apply your predetermined answer to it.

Why should we assume this Scripture passage is about eternal heaven or hell? Not even YLT makes that claim with its language?

My bad, yes, it's Samuel 14:14.

No, it's not taken out of context.

Next I'll be told that 1 Timothy 4:10 doesn't actually mean that ALL people are saved by Jesus.

1 Timothy 4:10 esv
For to this end we toil and strive,because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of ALL people, especially of those who believe.

Many falsely believe that God people day and night forever and ever.

Philippians 2:10-11 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Romans 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

Even scripture cannot compel one to modify their views. People are married to the false doctrine that Jesus tortures people for eternity.

Ephesians 1:10 As a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in Him, things in heaven and things on earth.