2 edits
Originally posted by galveston75No, you have not addressed Matt 25:41.
Oh but yes it does. If one were to see what he bible says about God and his love for man then this thought of God burning someone forever and ever who had sinned then the scripture that says "the wages of sin is death" would not be true.
To be truthful the scripture would have to say "the wages of sin is eternal torture".
Adam was told he would die e with Satan being in control of, why is Satan and his angels seen in it and suffering?
"The wages of sin is death" could mean the physical act of dying. This is perfectly compatible with punishment in the afterlife.
You're quoting the OT as an example of the merciful God? Really? I think you are again guilty of ignoring the parts of the Bible you don't like, that don't fit neatly into your theories. God ordered Israel to utterly annihilate the Canaanites, down to the women, children, elderly, infants, and sometimes even their animals. He incinerated people alive, made the earth swallow them up, struck people with plagues, etc. etc. Merciful? Seriously? He killed 70000 Israelites because King David wanted to take a census.
Originally posted by galveston75Finally a theory that takes Matt 25:41 into account. Thank you.
So what was Jesus referring when he spoke of a person’s being thrown “into hell”? The original Greek word translated “hell” at Mark 9:47 is Geenna. This word comes from the Hebrew Geh Hinnom, meaning “Valley of Hinnom.” The Valley of Hinnom hugged the outskirts of ancient Jerusalem. In the days of the Israelite kings, it was used for child sacrifice—a di ...[text shortened]... meant that they would live forever, suffering misery in a fiery hell, would he not have said so?
I think your interpretation [or whatever site you may have cribbed it from] is certainly defensible. Well done.
2 edits
Originally posted by SwissGambitHumm? I did address it so maybe you missed that point. Jesus was not teaching any such thing as a burning hell.
No, you have not addressed Matt 25:41.
"The wages of sin is death" could mean the physical act of dying. This is perfectly compatible with punishment in the afterlife.
You're quoting the OT as an example of the merciful God? Really? I think you are again guilty of ignoring the parts of the Bible you don't like, that don't fit neatly into your theor ...[text shortened]... Merciful? Seriously? He killed 70000 Israelites because King David wanted to take a census.
I'll repost this comment again.... Although most translations use the word “punishment” at Matthew 25:46, the basic meaning of the Greek word kolasin is “checking the growth of trees,” or pruning, cutting off needless branches. So while the sheeplike ones receive everlasting life, the unrepentant goatlike ones suffer “eternal punishment,” being forever cut off from life.
This everlasting cutting off simply means not existing anymore on any level and not ecver having the chance to be resurrected, ever. If one were to still suffer after death, then how could one be dead? AGAIN the Bible makes it very very clear that "the wages of one sinning is death".
NO where does the Bible explain in anyway that after one dies they wil be punished in a burning hell for eternity.
And if one were to understand why he had those nations destroyed then one would understand the need in that and why he was directing the Isrealites to do that warfare with those nations.
God is the reader of hearts and he knew those nations were bad and had no interest in doing things in a righteuos and clean way and they had to be removed to keep their wicked influances away from the Isrealites and to protect the seed of Abraham who was Jesus.
Originally posted by galveston75Yeah, my bad, I responded to your first post, then read your 2nd one. I still think you should leave Jer. 7:31 out of your presentation though. It only detracts from the rest of your case, which is pretty good.
Humm? I did address it so maybe you missed that point. Jesus was not teaching any such thing as a burning hell.
I'll repost this comment again.... Although most translations use the word “punishment” at Matthew 25:46, the basic meaning of the Greek word kolasin is “checking the growth of trees,” or pruning, cutting off needless branches. So while th ...[text shortened]... wicked influances away from the Isrealites and to protect the seed of Abraham who was Jesus.
1 edit
Originally posted by SwissGambitThanks. Well actually that just gives insight to God's view of not using such a thing as burning a human alive no matter what the circumstances and that would include in our worship to him. It is something abhorent in his eyes so why would he have a place or make any humans go to such a place to suffer for eternity?
Yeah, my bad, I responded to your first post, then read your 2nd one. I still think you should leave Jer. 7:31 out of your presentation though. It only detracts from the rest of your case, which is pretty good.
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75Num 16:35 And fire came out from the LORD and consumed the 250 men who were offering the incense.
Thanks. Well actually that just gives insight to God's view of not using such a thing as burning a human alive no matter what the circumstances and that would include in our worship to him. It is something abhorent in his eyes so why would he have a place or make any humans go to such a place to suffer for eternity?
Job 1:16 While he was still speaking, another messenger came and said, “The fire of God fell from the heavens and burned up the sheep and the servants, and I am the only one who has escaped to tell you!”
2 Kings 1:10
Elijah answered the captain, “If I am a man of God, may fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty men!” Then fire fell from heaven and consumed the captain and his men.
Luke 17:29
But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all.
Revelation 20:9
They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God’s people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them.
😵
Originally posted by Conrau KPell made the following argument to the young boy:
[b]Pell's very argument for the existence of hell is so that there is a place for the Hitler's of the world to go. For him to then turn around and say he hopes nobody in hell is at best ridiculously disingenuous.
No, it isn't. He says that the scales of justice require Hitler's punishment, Hell is an appropriate place but it is possible to hop ...[text shortened]... to Purgatory. Reread the Cardinal's words. You are attributing to him claims he never made.[/b]
I said to this kid - I said simply "Hitler. You think Hitler might be in hell? Started the Second World War, caused the death of 50 million or would you prefer a system where Hitler got away with it for free?
The premise for the argument for the existence of hell is that it is the place for the Hitler's of the world to go. That it is required so that Hitler does not "[get] away with it for free".
The issue here is that most religions teach as a doctrine, that something lives on after death. They say it is either the soul or a spirit or something that maintains some kind of conscieness. But nothing of that sort is taught anywhere in the Bible.
From the very beginning the Bible has clearly said that when one dies all their thoughts and plans, etc, end. They perish and no more thought process continues UNTIL they are resurrected. Jesus is a prime example. He was dead for those 3 days and he had no thoughts or any actions of anykind, anywhere. If he was not truly dead he could not have been the sacrifice that he had to be for mankind.
The reason why so many religions teach some kind of after life is because of the introduction of those beliefs into the church a few hundred years after Jesus died, which he fortold would happen, and it has continued down to this day.
These beliefs all have paganistic origins and are not taught in the Bible anywhere.
The Bible no where tells of an existance of any kind for a human while in a dead condition.
But the Bible does promise a resurrection of a select few who will go to heaven and will be Kings and Judges as part of the Kingdom or government that Jesus will be the appointed king over from his Father.
All the rest of the dead will be resurrected here on earth to be judged. For the ones who are judged not worthy to live on this earth because of their decisions made then, they will be put back to death and will never be resurrected again to any kind of life or existance ever
Originally posted by SwissGambitYes that did happen. But what is the result of that action by God? Did these people suffer for days or years or eternity? It was probably an instant death so the point were discussing does not apply to the discussion of a burning hell fire somewhere that a human would be in forever.
Num 16:35 And fire came out from the LORD and consumed the 250 men who were offering the incense.
Job 1:16 While he was still speaking, another messenger came and said, “The fire of God fell from the heavens and burned up the sheep and the servants, and I am the only one who has escaped to tell you!”
2 Kings 1:10
Elijah answered the captain, “If ...[text shortened]... camp of God’s people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them.
😵
Originally posted by galveston75There is nothing in the verses that indicates how fast or slow the death was. Point is, obviously God had no problem with burning people alive. I've provided 5 examples where he did it himself.
Yes that did happen. But what is the result of that action by God? Did these people suffer for days or years or eternity? It was probably an instant death so the point were discussing does not apply to the discussion of a burning hell fire somewhere that a human would be in forever.
Are you now willing to retract your statement:
Well actually that just gives insight to God's view of not using such a thing as burning a human alive no matter what the circumstances and that would include in our worship to him.
Originally posted by SwissGambitYou know the context of my statement.
There is nothing in the verses that indicates how fast or slow the death was. Point is, obviously God had no problem with burning people alive. I've provided 5 examples where he did it himself.
Are you now willing to retract your statement:Well actually that just gives insight to God's view of not using such a thing as burning a human alive no matter what the circumstances and that would include in our worship to him.
Originally posted by galveston75This is the entire post:
You know the context of my statement.
Thanks. Well actually that just gives insight to God's view of not using such a thing as burning a human alive no matter what the circumstances and that would include in our worship to him. It is something abhorent in his eyes so why would he have a place or make any humans go to such a place to suffer for eternity?I think this post is a painfully clear claim that God would never, ever burn someone alive. You can't say I took it out of context, because adding the rest of the post content just reinforces this claim. I don't see how you can continue to assert that claim after the 5 counterexamples I gave you.
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsI am sorry that you are disturbed about anyone receiving punishment in hell,
but you need to get over it, because it appears there will be many who will not
repent.
The operative word here is appears. To you, but not o me.
In a story Jesus tells of the begger, named Lazarus,....
This story is clearly alegorical. It cannot possibly be interpreted physically or literally for many reasons, e.g. the "gulf" - do you really think that you will enjoy heaven when you can see, constantly, into Hell across the "gulf" how some of your loved ones suffer? (on second thoughts, maybe YOU won't mind, knowing you a little by now...) Also, did the rich man REALLY think a drop of water would help? No, this is a picture. Another thing, the "sin" of the rich man here was NOT rejecting Christ and his salvation, but the lack of good works and sympathy. Is this also your doctrine??
But mercy did not come. So in your eyes, you must see Jesus as a lesser
judge than any on Earth, since He makes the flames of Hell that ere orignally
just designed for Satan and his demonic angels, also punishment for man.
My point exactly. Because Jesus is, in my eyes, NOT less than the lowest judge, he would NOT do this. The "He makes etc" are YOUR words. I say "He DOES NOT MAKE...."
The overall tenor of your posts constanly indicate that you really have no idea of the character of God, nor any idea of who Jesus really is. Therefore a person like you would have no problem with God casting all the people you don't like into this burning hell....
:'(
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneNo it isn't and he never says that. Hell is certainly a place for the Hitlers of the world but as he explains later, this is not the only place. He mentions the 'scales of justice' specifically in the context of purgatory. The point is that one does not get off free in purgatory.
That it is required so that Hitler does not "[get] away with it for free".
3 edits
Originally posted by Conrau KReread my post.
No it isn't and he never says that. Hell is certainly a place for the Hitlers of the world but as he explains later, this is not the only place. He mentions the 'scales of justice' specifically in the context of purgatory. The point is that one does not get off free in purgatory.
Pell made the following argument to the young boy:
[quote]I said to this kid - I said simply "Hitler. You think Hitler might be in hell? Started the Second World War, caused the death of 50 million or would you prefer a system where Hitler got away with it for free?
The premise for the argument for the existence of hell is that it is the place for the Hitler's of the world to go. That it is required so that Hitler does not "[get] away with it for free".[/quote]
Clearly I am speaking of the "argument to the young boy". Pell is arguing for the existence of hell WITH THE YOUNG BOY. In that argument WITH THE YOUNG BOY the premise of the argument FOR THE EXISTENCE OF HELL is that it is a place for the Hitler's of the world to go. In that argument WITH THE YOUNG BOY FOR THE EXISTENCE OF HELL, hell is required so that Hitler does not "[get] away with it for free". Purgatory was NOT mentioned in Pell's argument WITH THE YOUNG BOY.
I've dumbed it down about as much as I possibly can. Seems I shouldn't have to keep pointing out the obvious, but with every discussion I have with you that I can recall, I have had to do so repeatedly. It's like trying to have a discussion with a little kid who is so determined to be right that he tosses out any argument no matter how flawed or even ridiculous. Your patterns of thought are positively juvenile whether or not you want to admit it.