Read Psalm 37:20 like I asked, please. The information is there. All a person needs to do is read the bible and accept what it says.
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Why do some people think Hell isn't real?
- Thread starter ssammoh
- Start date
- Status
I don't have your position wrong. In fact, I know exactly your position and I am trying to help you see the reality of what you claim to believe.
Not being a wiseguy, here.
If you can just see the limited view this...
...represents, and see what the Lord is teaching, you would rephrase this to...
I believe we have eternal life.
We get it from Jesus Christ. Those that perish do not have life at all.
They are already dead. This is what you are missing.
John 6:53
King James Version (KJV)
53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
So you do embrace soul sleep.
Are you a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses?
After you have proven that the dead are not really dead, then I will concede the point. If you want we can go to a morgue and look at some dead bodies. Then you will have to concede the point that dead people are not conscious.(I can't believe we are even having a disagreement on this)
I have several times gave the explicit statement of the Lord to that effect. shall we go on in our look at LIFE and death?
Do you really not differentiate between the Life of Christ and physical life which all men have? Between spiritual life (which is to be distinguished from merely having a spirit as all men have) and physical life?
Physical death and spiritual death?
Do you believe man is in relationship with God when he is born?
(I can't believe we are even having a disagreement on this
It is foundational to our differing beliefs.
There is no point in discussing annihilation at all until this one aspect of the discussion is decided. We can agree, or agree to disagree, but you have toanswer in the positive or negative to the questions posed above.
And the conclusion can be easily verified in scripture.
God bless.
Upvote
0
dollarsbill
Well-Known Member
I have. Hell is real and forever. God burns sinners alive in fire.
Upvote
0
While not addressed to me, I would respond to this:
Psalm 37:16-20
King James Version (KJV)
16 A little that a righteous man hath is better than the riches of many wicked.
17 For the arms of the wicked shall be broken: but the Lord upholdeth the righteous.
18 The Lord knoweth the days of the upright: and their inheritance shall be for ever.
19 They shall not be ashamed in the evil time: and in the days of famine they shall be satisfied.
20 But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the Lord shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.
Unless one wants to view God as breaking the arms of the wicked in Hell, one is forced to see this for what it is...a temporal passage that speaks of the temporal judgment that befalls the wicked.
Now to just clarify, "breaking the arms" is, I believe, a reference to the power the wicked have, not a literal reference to breaking particular members of the body. Now, unless one wants to suggest that the wicked will have power in Hell, they are agiain forced to view this as a temporal passage dealing with temporal judgment on the wicked.
I have not had opportunity to finish the list of scripture you provided, yet, Timothew, and judging how the first ones have been received I am not sure it would mean anything, but what you will find in the Old Testament verses used to justify soul sleep and annihilation is that because revelation concerning resurrection and the condition of those that died is very limited, it is easy to merge the revelation of both and misconstrue the intent in the Old Testament passages.
Another aspect that will need to be dealt with is the error of making the word "soul" mean the immaterial aspect of man in every instance it is used.
But that is another discussion.
God bless.
Upvote
0
No, and once again those who can't support their false doctrine resort to ad hominem attacks.
It is sad, really that you believe your doctrine and have no biblical support for it, but you reject all of the biblical supprt for my position and then start in with the name-calling. Are you a Mormon? They believe in eternal torture in hell. You must be a Mormon. Are you a Muslim? They believe in eternal torture in hell. You must be a Muslim.
Upvote
0
Small wonder: we see this in scripture.
So we generalize God's word into anything that teaches a moral lesson.
Does this mean you accept some of Hollywood's efforts as the word of God?
No, it isn't.
Paul is contrasting the First and the New Covenants, and contrasting the "receptors."
I challenge you to produce scripture to verify your statement.
This is human reasoning.
It is written:
Hebrews 4:12
King James Version (KJV)
12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
There are a number of verses and passages we could include to show that "Once anything is written, it is no longer alive" cannot be supportted from scripture, either Old or New Testament.
Are you sure you meant "immutable?"
Also incorrect: people begin to reject it, corrupt, and use it for their own purposes, rather than that which it was given for.
Because they will not conform to that which is commanded of God, they create their own god, and this is much easier if they are the ones that determine which parts are valid and which are not.
And I would agree a legalistic mindset is something even the most liberal purveyor of sloopy grace is in danger of. But that is what the word of God is for: to instruct on THE WAY, not A WAY (of one's own choosing).
I actually thought this humorous.
But of course reasonable men would understand the ring has been forever destroyed, just as the First Covenant has been abrogated by the New.
So those of us that realize this try to reason with the leagalist and convince him that it is okay to wear a ring, lol.
How about "Love the Lord thy God with all your heart, mind, and strength?"
You don't mention that too much.
And to consider the word of God entertaining, well, I would just ask which of your accepted "scripture" do you find entertaining?
And heart.
Pity.
So you are a matrix theology advocate as well?
Okay with buddhism, hinduism, and new age philosophy?
As with soul sleep and annihilation, this to is creeping into the aisles of modern Christendom, gaining more and more acceptance as we edge into the end of the last days.
Correction: God manifest in the flesh...did those things. Christ was fully man, fully God.
ONE did:
Acts 20:28
King James Version (KJV)
28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
What to happened to all that love you were talking about?
He did not turn "their" scripture against them, but expounded upon His own.
Could you show me that?
Judaism, by the way, was given by God Himself. The problem arose when faith in His written word fell away, and men added their own word to it.
Could you show me that as well? My guess is that the derision belongs solely to you.
Again, please show me this in scripture.
It is true that Hebrews teaches that there is much that is "better" concerning the New Covenant compared to the First. But I am not familiar with your quote, so if you would produce that, it would be appreciated. Then we can do some of that "critical thinking" you were talking about.
Continued...
Upvote
0
It wasn't an attack, it was a sincere question, Timothew. Seldom do I find those that specifically hold to both doctrines that are not JWs. It happens, but usually people embrace annihilation but usually don't fall for soul sleep, being easily enough disproven.
Why would you consider this an attack, by the way? you have common ground with them. I guess this means you do not consider them to be Christian?
I will overlook the tirade in this and just respond as I have, lol.
God bless.
Upvote
0
Soulgazer
Christian Gnostic
To not, would be to "have a form of Godliness and deny the power thereof".
No, it isn't.
Paul is contrasting the First and the New Covenants, and contrasting the "receptors."
I challenge you to produce scripture to verify your statement.
This is human reasoning.
It is written:
Hebrews 4:12
King James Version (KJV)
12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
There are a number of verses and passages we could include to show that "Once anything is written, it is no longer alive" cannot be supportted from scripture, either Old or New Testament.
Are you sure you meant "immutable?"
Also incorrect: people begin to reject it, corrupt, and use it for their own purposes, rather than that which it was given for.
Because they will not conform to that which is commanded of God, they create their own god, and this is much easier if they are the ones that determine which parts are valid and which are not.
And I would agree a legalistic mindset is something even the most liberal purveyor of sloopy grace is in danger of. But that is what the word of God is for: to instruct on THE WAY, not A WAY (of one's own choosing).
I actually thought this humorous.
But of course reasonable men would understand the ring has been forever destroyed, just as the First Covenant has been abrogated by the New. [/quote] Annihilated?
That which you have done unto the least of these, you have done unto me. Therefor to "Love the lord thy God" you must love your neighbor.
Didn't think I'd have to.
And heart.
Pity.
So you are a matrix theology advocate as well?
Okay with buddhism, hinduism, and new age philosophy?
As with soul sleep and annihilation, this to is creeping into the aisles of modern Christendom, gaining more and more acceptance as we edge into the end of the last days.
Correction: God manifest in the flesh...did those things. Christ was fully man, fully God.
ONE did:
Acts 20:28
King James Version (KJV)
28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
What to happened to all that love you were talking about?
He did not turn "their" scripture against them, but expounded upon His own.
Could you show me that?
Judaism, by the way, was given by God Himself. The problem arose when faith in His written word fell away, and men added their own word to it. [/quote] agreed...anything other than "I AM" is made up.
You don't accept "outside" scripture, so it would be pointless to quote it. However I did paraphrase enough of the Gospels that you should have been able to discern this.
Jesus pointed out in several places where the "Old Testament" was "imperfect", in other words "Unreliable". Now, as "John" said that his stories could fill the whole world, how many other "imperfections" were pointed out? You can't know...yet it is still treated as "perfect", which I have to reject.
Or is that "human reasoning" also? LOL. Do I have to point out that it is common for a bibliophile who can't explain his mental calisthenics to blame the "human reasoning" of the listener?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Your syllogistic conclusion is achieved by first erring in your premises.
Christ did not nullify the intent of the word of God, and said so Himself:
Matthew 5:18
King James Version (KJV)
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Can I suggest that why so many struggle with this and blur the lines is a failure to distinguish when the term "the Law" refers to the word of God (written) and the Covenant?
Here, we have in view the written law, which, like the New Testament, is alive.
That the First Covenant has been abrogated does not mean that now we view it as somehow in error or not holy, right, good, and pure. It will always be those things.
Consider:
Hebrews 8:8
King James Version (KJV)
8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
The fault was not with the Law, either the written word or the Covenant...it was with those that failed to obey.
And this is the glory of the New Covenant that needs to be seen: God Himself is the Author and Finisher (Completer) of faith. When He promised the New Covenant, He said:
Ezekiel 36:27
King James Version (KJV)
27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.
Yes, it was:
Psalm 18:30
King James Version (KJV)
30 As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the Lord is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him.
...because the God Who gave it is perfect.
The problem is with man, not God. But that is a very basic principle in scripture, isn't it? Unless one does not view man to be born in/with sin.
Again, I would ask you to employ a little critical thinking to your own conclusions.
And...forgive me for mine, lol.
Continued...
Upvote
0
I don't believe it is a sincere question, from you or him.
I believe it is an attempt to poison the well. "Oh, that guy is just like those cult members, you can't believe anything he says."
Upvote
0
Soulgazer
Christian Gnostic
I am. But it does take a critical thinker to know a critical thinker. That verse in Matthew was aimed specifically against Paul. Matthew was written in Antioch a full generation after Paul was headquartered there. It's no secret that Jewish Christians had problems with Paul.
Hebrews says that if the first covenant was perfect there would have been no need for the second. Jesus pointed out some flaws in it. Remember a Man was killed for gathering firewood on a Sabbath? Jesus said that the Sabbath was created for men, not men for the Sabbath. One of several.
Imperfect=flawed=untrustworthy.
"whatsoever you have done to the least of these, you have done to me". Moses killed God for gathering firewood.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Actually, you pointed out where you feel the Lord implied imperfection and unreliability.
If that were the case, why then would He quote it at all?
And if things slow down a little, I am not averse to looking at your scriptures, so much.
But, understand: you have come to a Christian Forum where most reject such "scriptures," so the burden would be more on you to show why the majority is wrong. That is supposed to be objective, but I can understand how one might feel they have a better understanding, as it is no different then when I speak with atheists, I feel I have the better, and they do as well.
Considering your commentary on Exodus 33, I would not be so sure you have heard all of them.
Something else I would suggest: if the Bible concludes Israel on a national basis to have been blinded with a veil...I don't think I would go around giving them as a reference to fortify my position.
The Lord spoke about Satan:
John 8
King James Version (KJV
33 They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?
34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
35 And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.
36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
37 I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.
38 I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.
39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.
40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.
41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
Moses is not in view, it is Abraham they appeal to.
Continued...
Upvote
0
Soulgazer
Christian Gnostic
Jeff Davis and Pres Lincoln would quote each other. Besides even the Old testament has to get something right once in a while, just by chance
(back atch!) PAUL stated that the Jewish Christians were blinded with a veil because they looked to the Torah. This is entirely consistent with the Naasene view. Judaism was not one big happy camp--- you will note in several places in the New testament where the Law was given to Moses via Angels,(Historically beings vastly inferior to Christ)and not by the direct finger of God.
This is entirely consistent with the Naasene view, "when he speaketh a lie" when they have Jesus refer disparagingly in this verse. Even in acts, which I consider to be a late homogenization of several earlier versions, Steven was stoned for blasphemy against God AND Moses. And of course, "God is Spirit" and no one has seen Him at any time. Not Abraham when they shared sandwiches together, and Moses did not see His butt.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
dollarsbill
Well-Known Member
Quite erroneous.
Exodus 31:18 (NASB)
18 When He had finished speaking with him upon Mount Sinai, He gave Moses the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written by the finger of God.
Upvote
0
That's okay, it is not I that boasted of being a critical thinker. lol
What verse? 5:18?
Are we back to catholic/jewish conspiracies?
Matthew was written to get back at Paul for effectively contending for the Once Delivered Faith?
Alrighty then.
Again, look at the context:
Hebrews 8:7-9
King James Version (KJV)
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
We would also look at...
Galatians 3:21
King James Version (KJV)
21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
The problem was with them, Soulgazer. You are grasping a straws based upon syllogistic conclusion and faith in the word of men. As I said, Jews outside of Christ and historians are hardly a reputable source.
You have not made that case.
Numbers 15
King James Version (KJV)
32 And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.
33 And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.
34 And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.
35 And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.
36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses.
The same Lord that is Lord of the Sabbath is the same Lord that punished the disobedience of this man.
There is no change, there is no contradiction.
Not even one, yet.
In the wilderness, adherence and punishment was crucial, even as in the establishment of the Church we see Ananias and Sapphira put to death.
The error of the Pharisees was to fail to understand this:
Matthew 23:23
King James Version (KJV)
23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
There is a balance.
Alrighty then.
Okay, have to get going.
God bless.
Upvote
0
Jeff Davis and Pres Lincoln would quote each other. Besides even the Old testament has to get something right once in a while, just by chance
Judaism was not one big happy camp--- you will note in several places in the New testament where the Law was given to Moses via Angels,(Historically beings vastly inferior to Christ)and not by the direct finger of God.
This is entirely consistent with the Naasene view, "when he speaketh a lie" when they have Jesus refer disparagingly in this verse. Even in acts, which I consider to be a late homogenization of several earlier versions, Steven was stoned for blasphemy against God AND Moses.
Again your faith in man is great.
Paul did not villify the Law, and most students know this. What is missing from your basis is understanding Paul's attempt to mediate the New Covenant.
God bless.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
