Originally posted by checkbaiter BTW...I also do not believe the bible is interpreted correctly, when speaking of eternal torment.
how would you interpret this? i don't really understand it all, so i started a thread on it but it got a bit convoluted and i ended up not understanding half of it...
Originally posted by genius how would you interpret this? i don't really understand it all, so i started a thread on it but it got a bit convoluted and i ended up not understanding half of it...
Do you realize how your simple post pretty well sums up the history of the Christian church?
Removed
Joined
08 Dec '04
Moves
100919
24 Sep '05 19:112 edits
Originally posted by genius how would you interpret this? i don't really understand it all, so i started a thread on it but it got a bit convoluted and i ended up not understanding half of it...
Are you referring to eternal torment?
The bible verses that support this are easy..
I Jn 5:12
12 He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.
(NKJ)
It would seem that eternal life is a prerequisite to eternal torment.
There are many more...
John 3:16
16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
(NKJ)
Those that believe do not perish as opposed to those that don't.
Originally posted by checkbaiter Well...I wouldn't exactly say sweet. An unbeliever would burn, but then die and cease to exist. Not my idea of sweet....😉
I have it on good authority (lucifershammer et. al.) that Hell consists merely of separation from God. No literal buring is involved. Do you think that scripture firmly supports your view of Hell? If so, what scriptural evidence do you have for this view?
Originally posted by bbarr I have it on good authority (lucifershammer et. al.) that Hell consists merely of separation from God.
They are not speaking on behalf of Catholicism, then.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm
From Section VI. of the Catholic Enyclopedia's entry for Hell:
"According to the greater number of theologians the term fire denotes a material fire, and so a real fire. We hold to this teaching as absolutely true and correct."
"Some few of the Fathers also thought of a metaphorical explanation. Nevertheless, Scripture and tradition speak again and again of the fire of hell, and there is no sufficient reason for taking the term as a mere metaphor."
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles They are not speaking on behalf of Catholicism, then.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm
From Section VI. of the Catholic Enyclopedia's entry for Hell:
"According to the greater number of theologians the term fire denotes a material fire, and so a [b]real fire. We hold to this teaching as absolutely true and correct."
...[text shortened]... of the fire of hell, and there is no sufficient reason for taking the term as a mere metaphor."[/b]
Well, O.K then. Eeep. That was one of the few things I thought Catholicism had going for it compared to other sects of Christianity.
Originally posted by bbarr Well, O.K then. Eeep. That was one of the few things I thought Catholicism had going for it compared to other sects of Christianity.
The last time I brought that up with LH, he cited another major Catholic source that said hell was not a literal fire, so at the very least, as a class of believers, they can't get their story straight on such a major theological point. Can you blame them, when the doctrine makers obviously have to equivocate to the degree of a circus act to make the literal Biblical interpretation conform to the physical implications of an eternally burning fire and an eternally scorching physical pain.
Removed
Joined
08 Dec '04
Moves
100919
24 Sep '05 22:57
Originally posted by bbarr I have it on good authority (lucifershammer et. al.) that Hell consists merely of separation from God. No literal buring is involved. Do you think that scripture firmly supports your view of Hell? If so, what scriptural evidence do you have for this view?
I'm not sure, but I would not be surprised if they are correct. The only verse I have is the one about being tossed into the Lake of fire in Rev.
Removed
Joined
08 Dec '04
Moves
100919
24 Sep '05 23:01
Originally posted by bbarr Well, O.K then. Eeep. That was one of the few things I thought Catholicism had going for it compared to other sects of Christianity.
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles The last time I brought that up with LH, he cited another major Catholic source that said hell was not a literal fire, so at the very least, as a class of believers, they can't get their story straight on such a major theological point. Can you blame them, when the doctrine makers obviously have to equivocate to the degree of a circus act to ...[text shortened]... the physical implications of an eternally burning fire and an eternally scorching physical pain.
An advice for the Dear Doctor, Bbarr and other interested people. If you want to study the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, please consult the Cathechism of the Catholic Church. It is an official Church document and the one and only truly reliable source concerning Church teachings (together with other official Church documents of course such as encyclicals)
Originally posted by ivanhoe An advice for the Dear Doctor, Bbarr and other interested people. If you want to study the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, please consult the Cathechism of the Catholic Church. It is an official Church document and the one and only truly reliable source concerning Church teachings.
Items 1033 through 1035 are an example of the equivocation that I referred to.
It speaks of hell as a literal "furnace of fire" into which Jesus' angels throw cursed people --- those who "refuse to believe and be converted," such as Jews.
It also speaks of hell as a "state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God."
Then it wraps up by saying, "The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell," immediately after equivocating on what the term means.
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles Items 1033 through 1035 are an example of the equivocation that I referred to.
It speaks of hell as a literal "furnace of fire" into which Jesus' angels throw cursed people --- those who "refuse to believe and be converted," such as Jews.
It also speaks of hell as a "state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God."
Then i ...[text shortened]... e Church affirms the existence of hell," immediately after equivocating on what the term means.
Dr.S: " those who "refuse to believe and be converted," such as Jews."
Please Dear Doctor, do not jump to conclusions. The amount of non-sense in the world about the teachings of the RC Church is big enough as it is. There is no need of adding to it.
Originally posted by ivanhoe Dr.S: " those who "refuse to believe and be converted," such as Jews.
Please Dear Doctor, do not jump to conclusions.
According to the source you cited, is hell reservered for people such as Jews who refuse to believe in Jesus and who refuse to convert to Christianity? Or when it speaks of those who "refuse to believe and be converted," is it refering strictly to non-Jews?
24 Sep '05 15:31
A Question for Christians Of All Kinds
Back to Top