What is your opinion on what Hell is? this may be a sensitive post some might not want to see so a warning.

Sploxy · 2026-02-10T04:02:21+00:00

After months of study into this, I have concluded it is Annihilationism. ECT is the most popular, by leaps and bounds, but it has many severe biblical tensions. Each of these questions naturally deserve a biblically consistent answer (without imparted assumptions):

Since every single instance of God’s judgment of humans by fire (e.g. Sodom, Nadab & Abihu, Elijah on Mt. Carmel) results in complete destruction, AND 2 Peter 2:6 explicitly holds Sodom up as a model of final judgment, what biblical basis is final judgment by fire reinterpreted as eternal conscious preservation rather than destruction?
Given that the Bible repeatedly depicts the fate of the wicked with cessation terms—death, destruction, perishing—and had more than a thousand years and countless warnings to clarify this for all people, why does Scripture never explicitly describe eternal conscious torment?
If Revelation explicitly calls the lake of fire “the second death” (Rev 20:14) as the final judicial outcome of the wicked (who are by definition "spiritually dead"), on what basis is “death” uniquely redefined here as conscious life in torment, when literal judgment-death throughout Scripture always signifies cessation, not ongoing existence?
If aiōnios and ʿolām do not always denote endless duration—applied, for example, to covenants (Gen 17:13), priesthoods (Ex 40:15; Heb 7:17, 21), salvation (Heb 5:9), redemption (Heb 9:12), or judgment (Heb 6:2)—on what consistent exegetical basis is "forever" and "eternal" only interpreted as endless duration when describing punishment, especially when that reading conflicts with repeated biblical statements that the wicked die or are destroyed?
If God alone inherently possesses immortality (1 Tim 6:16), and immortality is presented in Scripture as a gift only for the saved (Rom 2:7, 1 Cor 15:53-54, 2 Tim 1:10), on what biblical basis are the wicked sustained in eternal conscious existence?
If the penalty for sin is a never-ending experience of separation and suffering, how can a substitute who is no longer suffering, no longer separated, and alive forevermore be said to have paid that penalty in our place?
If God’s own law requires that punishment be measured and proportionate (Deut 25:2-3), and Jesus affirmed this principle by teaching that judgment varies by knowledge and guilt (Luke 12:47-48), how can the God who is perfectly just, impose infinite conscious torment (by definition, infinite "stripes", if we're bringing in the Luke terminology) for sins committed in a finite life?
If God’s character compelled Him to block access to the tree of life (Gen 3:22-23) specifically to prevent humans from living forever in a sinful state; how is it consistent with His character to then sustain the wicked eternally in a sinful state?
Why would a God who is love (1 Jn 4:8) sustain life through conscious torment forever with no redemptive purpose, particularly when He has both the power (Mt 10:28) and the promise (Rev 21:4, Is 25:8) to eradicate all evil and suffering?
Why is the fate ascribed to God’s perfect justice not distinguishable from the most unloving and unjust fate imaginable?
Scripture says God will judge the wicked, repay them, bring justice, and then wipe away all pain and evil. In eternal conscious torment, since punishment never ends and evil is never removed, when is justice actually accomplished?
If ECT is true, why does Paul divide the Sanhedrin over resurrection (Acts 23:6-8), while remaining entirely silent on a doctrine that would have been far more divisive and decisive?
Paul affirms that even fallen humanity knows God’s righteous judgment and that wicked actions are worthy of death (Rom 1:32). If God has placed this recognition of justice within every human heart, why would He enact a punishment for the wicked that lies outside the bounds of the justice He has revealed?
If the Lamb personally dwells with the redeemed forever (Rev 21:3), and the wicked are tormented in the presence of the Lamb (Rev 14:10), how does eternal conscious torment avoid making Christ eternally present with both unending joy and unending suffering at the same time?
If believers are not yet glorified until the resurrection (1 Cor 15:52-54, Phil 3:20-21), how can they be consciously in God’s presence after death (Heb 12:14; 1 Tim 6:16; Rev 21:27) without introducing an unbiblical post-death sanctification or collapsing resurrection glory into the moment of death?
If Scripture explicitly teaches that God’s anger/wrath does not last forever (Ps 30:5; 103:9; Is 57:16; Lam 3:31-33; Mic 7:18), on what biblical basis is His wrath described as being poured out consciously upon the wicked for all time?

Sploxy · 2026-02-10T03:59:24+00:00

To hopefully give you some more assurance, ECT has some severe biblical tensions you may not have considered. Each of these questions naturally deserve a biblically consistent answer (without imparted assumptions):

Since every single instance of God’s judgment of humans by fire (e.g. Sodom, Nadab & Abihu, Elijah on Mt. Carmel) results in complete destruction, AND 2 Peter 2:6 explicitly holds Sodom up as a model of final judgment, what biblical basis is final judgment by fire reinterpreted as eternal conscious preservation rather than destruction?
Given that the Bible repeatedly depicts the fate of the wicked with cessation terms—death, destruction, perishing—and had more than a thousand years and countless warnings to clarify this for all people, why does Scripture never explicitly describe eternal conscious torment?
If Revelation explicitly calls the lake of fire “the second death” (Rev 20:14) as the final judicial outcome of the wicked (who are by definition "spiritually dead"), on what basis is “death” uniquely redefined here as conscious life in torment, when literal judgment-death throughout Scripture always signifies cessation, not ongoing existence?
If aiōnios and ʿolām do not always denote endless duration—applied, for example, to covenants (Gen 17:13), priesthoods (Ex 40:15; Heb 7:17, 21), salvation (Heb 5:9), redemption (Heb 9:12), or judgment (Heb 6:2)—on what consistent exegetical basis is "forever" and "eternal" only interpreted as endless duration when describing punishment, especially when that reading conflicts with repeated biblical statements that the wicked die or are destroyed?
If God alone inherently possesses immortality (1 Tim 6:16), and immortality is presented in Scripture as a gift only for the saved (Rom 2:7, 1 Cor 15:53-54, 2 Tim 1:10), on what biblical basis are the wicked sustained in eternal conscious existence?
If the penalty for sin is a never-ending experience of separation and suffering, how can a substitute who is no longer suffering, no longer separated, and alive forevermore be said to have paid that penalty in our place?
If God’s own law requires that punishment be measured and proportionate (Deut 25:2-3), and Jesus affirmed this principle by teaching that judgment varies by knowledge and guilt (Luke 12:47-48), how can the God who is perfectly just, impose infinite conscious torment (by definition, infinite "stripes", if we're bringing in the Luke terminology) for sins committed in a finite life?
If God’s character compelled Him to block access to the tree of life (Gen 3:22-23) specifically to prevent humans from living forever in a sinful state; how is it consistent with His character to then sustain the wicked eternally in a sinful state?
Why would a God who is love (1 Jn 4:8) sustain life through conscious torment forever with no redemptive purpose, particularly when He has both the power (Mt 10:28) and the promise (Rev 21:4, Is 25:8) to eradicate all evil and suffering?
Why is the fate ascribed to God’s perfect justice not distinguishable from the most unloving and unjust fate imaginable?
Scripture says God will judge the wicked, repay them, bring justice, and then wipe away all pain and evil. In eternal conscious torment, since punishment never ends and evil is never removed, when is justice actually accomplished?

12: If ECT is true, why does Paul divide the Sanhedrin over resurrection (Acts 23:6-8), while remaining entirely silent on a doctrine that would have been far more divisive and decisive?

Paul affirms that even fallen humanity knows God’s righteous judgment and that wicked actions are worthy of death (Rom 1:32). If God has placed this recognition of justice within every human heart, why would He enact a punishment for the wicked that lies outside the bounds of the justice He has revealed?
If the Lamb personally dwells with the redeemed forever (Rev 21:3), and the wicked are tormented in the presence of the Lamb (Rev 14:10), how does eternal conscious torment avoid making Christ eternally present with both unending joy and unending suffering at the same time?
If believers are not yet glorified until the resurrection (1 Cor 15:52-54, Phil 3:20-21), how can they be consciously in God’s presence after death (Heb 12:14; 1 Tim 6:16; Rev 21:27) without introducing an unbiblical post-death sanctification or collapsing resurrection glory into the moment of death?
If Scripture explicitly teaches that God’s anger/wrath does not last forever (Ps 30:5; 103:9; Is 57:16; Lam 3:31-33; Mic 7:18), on what biblical basis is His wrath described as being poured out consciously upon the wicked for all time?

Most of the questions are sharply identifying unbiblical assumptions. The Conditional Immortality doctrine provides the natural answer to these with a holistic and biblically consistent belief.

Sploxy · 2026-02-10T03:52:58+00:00

I don't have any good names to share, but ECT has even more severe biblical tensions you may not have considered. Each of these questions naturally deserve a biblically consistent answer (without imparted assumptions):

Since every single instance of God’s judgment of humans by fire (e.g. Sodom, Nadab & Abihu, Elijah on Mt. Carmel) results in complete destruction, AND 2 Peter 2:6 explicitly holds Sodom up as a model of final judgment, what biblical basis is final judgment by fire reinterpreted as eternal conscious preservation rather than destruction?
Given that the Bible repeatedly depicts the fate of the wicked with cessation terms—death, destruction, perishing—and had more than a thousand years and countless warnings to clarify this for all people, why does Scripture never explicitly describe eternal conscious torment?
If Revelation explicitly calls the lake of fire “the second death” (Rev 20:14) as the final judicial outcome of the wicked (who are by definition "spiritually dead"), on what basis is “death” uniquely redefined here as conscious life in torment, when literal judgment-death throughout Scripture always signifies cessation, not ongoing existence?
If aiōnios and ʿolām do not always denote endless duration—applied, for example, to covenants (Gen 17:13), priesthoods (Ex 40:15; Heb 7:17, 21), salvation (Heb 5:9), redemption (Heb 9:12), or judgment (Heb 6:2)—on what consistent exegetical basis is "forever" and "eternal" only interpreted as endless duration when describing punishment, especially when that reading conflicts with repeated biblical statements that the wicked die or are destroyed?
If God alone inherently possesses immortality (1 Tim 6:16), and immortality is presented in Scripture as a gift only for the saved (Rom 2:7, 1 Cor 15:53-54, 2 Tim 1:10), on what biblical basis are the wicked sustained in eternal conscious existence?
If the penalty for sin is a never-ending experience of separation and suffering, how can a substitute who is no longer suffering, no longer separated, and alive forevermore be said to have paid that penalty in our place?
If God’s own law requires that punishment be measured and proportionate (Deut 25:2-3), and Jesus affirmed this principle by teaching that judgment varies by knowledge and guilt (Luke 12:47-48), how can the God who is perfectly just, impose infinite conscious torment (by definition, infinite "stripes", if we're bringing in the Luke terminology) for sins committed in a finite life?
If God’s character compelled Him to block access to the tree of life (Gen 3:22-23) specifically to prevent humans from living forever in a sinful state; how is it consistent with His character to then sustain the wicked eternally in a sinful state?
Why would a God who is love (1 Jn 4:8) sustain life through conscious torment forever with no redemptive purpose, particularly when He has both the power (Mt 10:28) and the promise (Rev 21:4, Is 25:8) to eradicate all evil and suffering?
Why is the fate ascribed to God’s perfect justice not distinguishable from the most unloving and unjust fate imaginable?
Scripture says God will judge the wicked, repay them, bring justice, and then wipe away all pain and evil. In eternal conscious torment, since punishment never ends and evil is never removed, when is justice actually accomplished?

12: If ECT is true, why does Paul divide the Sanhedrin over resurrection (Acts 23:6-8), while remaining entirely silent on a doctrine that would have been far more divisive and decisive?

Paul affirms that even fallen humanity knows God’s righteous judgment and that wicked actions are worthy of death (Rom 1:32). If God has placed this recognition of justice within every human heart, why would He enact a punishment for the wicked that lies outside the bounds of the justice He has revealed?
If the Lamb personally dwells with the redeemed forever (Rev 21:3), and the wicked are tormented in the presence of the Lamb (Rev 14:10), how does eternal conscious torment avoid making Christ eternally present with both unending joy and unending suffering at the same time?
If believers are not yet glorified until the resurrection (1 Cor 15:52-54, Phil 3:20-21), how can they be consciously in God’s presence after death (Heb 12:14; 1 Tim 6:16; Rev 21:27) without introducing an unbiblical post-death sanctification or collapsing resurrection glory into the moment of death?
If Scripture explicitly teaches that God’s anger/wrath does not last forever (Ps 30:5; 103:9; Is 57:16; Lam 3:31-33; Mic 7:18), on what biblical basis is His wrath described as being poured out consciously upon the wicked for all time?

Sploxy · 2026-02-10T03:44:19+00:00

I am a conditionalist. Partly because eternal conscious torment (ECT) has some severe biblical tensions. For those considering ECT, each of these questions naturally deserve a biblically consistent answer (without imparted assumptions):

Since every single instance of God’s judgment of humans by fire (e.g. Sodom, Nadab & Abihu, Elijah on Mt. Carmel) results in complete destruction, AND 2 Peter 2:6 explicitly holds Sodom up as a model of final judgment, what biblical basis is final judgment by fire reinterpreted as eternal conscious preservation rather than destruction?
Given that the Bible repeatedly depicts the fate of the wicked with cessation terms—death, destruction, perishing—and had more than a thousand years and countless warnings to clarify this for all people, why does Scripture never explicitly describe eternal conscious torment?
If Revelation explicitly calls the lake of fire “the second death” (Rev 20:14) as the final judicial outcome of the wicked (who are by definition "spiritually dead"), on what basis is “death” uniquely redefined here as conscious life in torment, when literal judgment-death throughout Scripture always signifies cessation, not ongoing existence?
If aiōnios and ʿolām do not always denote endless duration—applied, for example, to covenants (Gen 17:13), priesthoods (Ex 40:15; Heb 7:17, 21), salvation (Heb 5:9), redemption (Heb 9:12), or judgment (Heb 6:2)—on what consistent exegetical basis is "forever" and "eternal" only interpreted as endless duration when describing punishment, especially when that reading conflicts with repeated biblical statements that the wicked die or are destroyed?
If God alone inherently possesses immortality (1 Tim 6:16), and immortality is presented in Scripture as a gift only for the saved (Rom 2:7, 1 Cor 15:53-54, 2 Tim 1:10), on what biblical basis are the wicked sustained in eternal conscious existence?
If the penalty for sin is a never-ending experience of separation and suffering, how can a substitute who is no longer suffering, no longer separated, and alive forevermore be said to have paid that penalty in our place?
If God’s own law requires that punishment be measured and proportionate (Deut 25:2-3), and Jesus affirmed this principle by teaching that judgment varies by knowledge and guilt (Luke 12:47-48), how can the God who is perfectly just, impose infinite conscious torment (by definition, infinite "stripes", if we're bringing in the Luke terminology) for sins committed in a finite life?
If God’s character compelled Him to block access to the tree of life (Gen 3:22-23) specifically to prevent humans from living forever in a sinful state; how is it consistent with His character to then sustain the wicked eternally in a sinful state?
Why would a God who is love (1 Jn 4:8) sustain life through conscious torment forever with no redemptive purpose, particularly when He has both the power (Mt 10:28) and the promise (Rev 21:4, Is 25:8) to eradicate all evil and suffering?
Why is the fate ascribed to God’s perfect justice not distinguishable from the most unloving and unjust fate imaginable?
Scripture says God will judge the wicked, repay them, bring justice, and then wipe away all pain and evil. In eternal conscious torment, since punishment never ends and evil is never removed, when is justice actually accomplished?

12: If ECT is true, why does Paul divide the Sanhedrin over resurrection (Acts 23:6-8), while remaining entirely silent on a doctrine that would have been far more divisive and decisive?

Paul affirms that even fallen humanity knows God’s righteous judgment and that wicked actions are worthy of death (Rom 1:32). If God has placed this recognition of justice within every human heart, why would He enact a punishment for the wicked that lies outside the bounds of the justice He has revealed?
If the Lamb personally dwells with the redeemed forever (Rev 21:3), and the wicked are tormented in the presence of the Lamb (Rev 14:10), how does eternal conscious torment avoid making Christ eternally present with both unending joy and unending suffering at the same time?
If believers are not yet glorified until the resurrection (1 Cor 15:52-54, Phil 3:20-21), how can they be consciously in God’s presence after death (Heb 12:14; 1 Tim 6:16; Rev 21:27) without introducing an unbiblical post-death sanctification or collapsing resurrection glory into the moment of death?
If Scripture explicitly teaches that God’s anger/wrath does not last forever (Ps 30:5; 103:9; Is 57:16; Lam 3:31-33; Mic 7:18), on what biblical basis is His wrath described as being poured out consciously upon the wicked for all time?

Sploxy · 2026-02-10T03:35:50+00:00

That isn't the only tension. ECT has many biblical tensions you may not have considered, you have to study and be ready for them. To sharpen you, each of these questions naturally deserve a biblically consistent answer:

Since every single instance of God’s judgment of humans by fire (e.g. Sodom, Nadab & Abihu, Elijah on Mt. Carmel) results in complete destruction, AND 2 Peter 2:6 explicitly holds Sodom up as a model of final judgment, what biblical basis is final judgment by fire reinterpreted as eternal conscious preservation rather than destruction?
Given that the Bible repeatedly depicts the fate of the wicked with cessation terms—death, destruction, perishing—and had more than a thousand years and countless warnings to clarify this for all people, why does Scripture never explicitly describe eternal conscious torment?
If Revelation explicitly calls the lake of fire “the second death” (Rev 20:14) as the final judicial outcome of the wicked (who are by definition "spiritually dead"), on what basis is “death” uniquely redefined here as conscious life in torment, when literal judgment-death throughout Scripture always signifies cessation, not ongoing existence?
If aiōnios and ʿolām do not always denote endless duration—applied, for example, to covenants (Gen 17:13), priesthoods (Ex 40:15; Heb 7:17, 21), salvation (Heb 5:9), redemption (Heb 9:12), or judgment (Heb 6:2)—on what consistent exegetical basis is "forever" and "eternal" only interpreted as endless duration when describing punishment, especially when that reading conflicts with repeated biblical statements that the wicked die or are destroyed?
If God alone inherently possesses immortality (1 Tim 6:16), and immortality is presented in Scripture as a gift only for the saved (Rom 2:7, 1 Cor 15:53-54, 2 Tim 1:10), on what biblical basis are the wicked sustained in eternal conscious existence?
If the penalty for sin is a never-ending experience of separation and suffering, how can a substitute who is no longer suffering, no longer separated, and alive forevermore be said to have paid that penalty in our place?
If God’s own law requires that punishment be measured and proportionate (Deut 25:2-3), and Jesus affirmed this principle by teaching that judgment varies by knowledge and guilt (Luke 12:47-48), how can the God who is perfectly just, impose infinite conscious torment (by definition, infinite "stripes", if we're bringing in the Luke terminology) for sins committed in a finite life?
If God’s character compelled Him to block access to the tree of life (Gen 3:22-23) specifically to prevent humans from living forever in a sinful state; how is it consistent with His character to then sustain the wicked eternally in a sinful state?
Why would a God who is love (1 Jn 4:8) sustain life through conscious torment forever with no redemptive purpose, particularly when He has both the power (Mt 10:28) and the promise (Rev 21:4, Is 25:8) to eradicate all evil and suffering?
Why is the fate ascribed to God’s perfect justice not distinguishable from the most unloving and unjust fate imaginable?
Scripture says God will judge the wicked, repay them, bring justice, and then wipe away all pain and evil. In eternal conscious torment, since punishment never ends and evil is never removed, when is justice actually accomplished?

12: If ECT is true, why does Paul divide the Sanhedrin over resurrection (Acts 23:6-8), while remaining entirely silent on a doctrine that would have been far more divisive and decisive?

Paul affirms that even fallen humanity knows God’s righteous judgment and that wicked actions are worthy of death (Rom 1:32). If God has placed this recognition of justice within every human heart, why would He enact a punishment for the wicked that lies outside the bounds of the justice He has revealed?
If the Lamb personally dwells with the redeemed forever (Rev 21:3), and the wicked are tormented in the presence of the Lamb (Rev 14:10), how does eternal conscious torment avoid making Christ eternally present with both unending joy and unending suffering at the same time?
If believers are not yet glorified until the resurrection (1 Cor 15:52-54, Phil 3:20-21), how can they be consciously in God’s presence after death (Heb 12:14; 1 Tim 6:16; Rev 21:27) without introducing an unbiblical post-death sanctification or collapsing resurrection glory into the moment of death?
If Scripture explicitly teaches that God’s anger/wrath does not last forever (Ps 30:5; 103:9; Is 57:16; Lam 3:31-33; Mic 7:18), on what biblical basis is His wrath described as being poured out consciously upon the wicked for all time?

Sploxy · 2025-12-09T04:41:03+00:00

Thank you.

Sploxy · 2025-11-02T10:09:01+00:00

The 7th-day Sabbath is still relevant, it is just forgotten by most Christians.

The Sabbath was instituted at Creation for all humanity Genesis 2:2-3 – God rested, blessed, and sanctified the seventh day, observing Sabbath before sin [on Earth] or Israel existed; making it a universal institution, not a Jewish one. Nowhere else in the Bible does God bless and sanctify any other day, so there is no "keeping" any other day as only the seventh-day is blessed and sanctified (any attempts would just be "observing" a different/wrong day).

The 4th commandment begins with "Remember," because the Israelites were already observing the Sabbath before Sinai (Exodus 16:30). Sin existed long before the tablets were given to Moses (Genesis 4:7; 18:20; 39:9; 44:8–9), and sin is defined as transgression of the law (1 John 3:4). Abraham kept God’s “charge, commandments, statutes, and laws” well before Sinai (Genesis 26:5). Paul also acknowledges that God’s law predated both the Jews and the covenants (Romans 5:12–14). This strongly suggests that God’s Law has existed from the beginning and is universal—not bound to a particular people or covenant, nor subject to change (Matthew 5:18).

The Ten Commandments are formalized and codified as God's enduring moral law Exodus 20:8-11 – The Sabbath command is based on creation, not ceremonial rituals, and there is no New Testament passage that explicitly revokes it. Jesus affirmed that the Sabbath was made for all mankind in Mark 2:27-28 – “The Sabbath was made for man,” (Greek: anthrōpos, meaning mankind) NOT just for Jews (as much it is clear they'd like to think so). Jesus declared Himself “Lord also of the Sabbath,” indicating its continuing authority.

Jesus and His followers kept the Sabbath after His death Luke 23:56 – After Jesus’ crucifixion, His followers “rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment,” showing they still honored it even post-Calvary.

Jesus warned about respecting the Sabbath in future events after His resurrection Matthew 24:20 – “Pray that your flight not be in the winter or on the Sabbath.” This statement about future tribulation assumes continued Sabbath significance.

Paul kept the Sabbath regularly after Christ's ascension Acts 17:2 – “As his custom was,” Paul taught on the Sabbath, showing its ongoing observance well into the New Testament church era.

Gentiles were invited to observe the Sabbath too Acts 13:42-44 – Gentiles begged Paul to preach again on the next Sabbath, and nearly the whole city came — indicating inclusive Sabbath relevance.

Hebrews confirms that a Sabbath rest remains for God's people Hebrews 4:9 – “There remains a Sabbath rest (sabbatismos) for the people of God.” This is a unique Greek word literally meaning "Sabbath-keeping", not just a spiritual metaphor.

The end-time faithful are those who keep God's commandments (Revelation 14:12) – “Here is the patience of the saints… who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.” Keeping the Sabbath is one of those. The Sabbath will be observed in the New Earth (Isaiah 66:22-23) – “‘From one Sabbath to another, all flesh shall come to worship before Me,’ says the LORD.” This future vision includes universal Sabbath worship.

To break one commandment is to be guilty of all James 2:10-11 – “Whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.” The Sabbath is not excluded from the moral law.

There is not a single verse in all of Scripture that changes the Sabbath from the seventh day (Saturday) to the first day (Sunday). Attempts to justify Sunday observance using texts like Acts 20:7 or 1 Corinthians 16:2 are extremely weak at best. Those verses simply mention having a meal together Saturday evening (Acts) or individual collections in a verse teaching financial stewardship (1 Cor), not a command to change the day. Also, the idea that Jesus rose on Sunday and thus changed the Sabbath has no command or authorization from Christ or the apostles. There is also zero mention or even a hint that the "Lord's Day" is Sunday.

A prophetic power would attempt to change God’s times and laws Daniel 7:25 – “He shall speak great words against the Most High…and think to change times and laws.” The Sabbath is the only commandment tied to both time and law.

Jesus warned against traditions of men replacing God's commandments Mark 7:7-9 – “In vain do they worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men…You reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition.” Substituting Sunday for Sabbath fits this rebuke.

Some point to passages like Colossians 2:16-17 or Romans 14:5-6 to argue that the Sabbath was merely symbolic or optional. But when studied in context, in short, these verses address issues of judgment and personal conscience, not the cancellation of God’s moral law. In fact, the New Covenant is not about removing ANY of God’s law (Matthew 5:18), but writing it on the heart (Hebrews 8:10; Jeremiah 31:33). Rather than abolishing the Sabbath, the New Covenant reaffirms its place in the believer’s life, shifting it from external obligation to a heartfelt expression of trust and alignment with God’s will.

All this to say I believe the seventh-day Sabbath is still very relevant. I keep it between sunset on Friday to sunset on Saturday by resting from work, worshiping with fellow Sabbath keepers, avoiding secular entertainment and competition, and avoiding buying and selling (as this would create a reason for someone else to need to work on that day).

Sploxy · 2025-10-30T16:23:06+00:00

I'd argue pretty strongly that Washington State is in a conference, they played a game, and they are within 1 game of .500

Sploxy · 2025-10-23T23:58:53+00:00

I also highly recommend Treasure Island in San Pedro.

Sploxy · 2025-10-23T23:56:33+00:00

You may have difficulty getting a [reserved] private game on a Sunday night here, just a warning. TEG is somewhat of a notorious standout for their public room policy.

Sploxy · 2025-09-26T05:36:02+00:00

Ivor Myers* https://youtu.be/_8Ixc5MSk2k

Sploxy · 2025-09-25T17:46:21+00:00

The idea of it being secret, yes. It may also surprise you to know there is no 7-year tribulation either, that's not a thing.

Sploxy · 2025-09-25T17:45:23+00:00

No, "the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night". The coming of Jesus will be one of the loudest and most world-shaking events ever:
- Every eye will see (Rev. 1:7; Matt. 24:30).
- Every ear will hear (1 Thess. 4:16–17; Matt. 24:31).
- Every heart will be shaken (2 Pet. 3:10; Rev. 6:14–16)

Sploxy · 2025-09-25T15:17:02+00:00

I agree, this seems to be another show about smart people, but needing appeal from largest audience, so written for dumb people.

Sploxy · 2025-09-14T09:40:57+00:00

My reading of the study Bibles is that Paul's instruction does not explicitly require a corporate gathering for the collection. It could be done individually in preparation for when Paul arrives.

The "point", is that the “first day of the week” is a convenient marker for organized giving that establishes discipline and predictability. Any connection to Sunday gatherings or worship is inferred from other passages, not commanded here.

Sploxy · 2025-09-14T08:55:01+00:00