- Aug 21, 2003
- 29,092
- 6,124
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
TOUCHE
And you can never quote a source that's going to be good enough. That's why I quit posting or reading his stuff anymore. It's all cut/past Jewish Encyclopedia belief at the time of Jesus....HELLO...The Jewish belief at the time of Jesus was corrupt as can be. That's who had all the doctrinal issues with JEsus to begin with. Pharisees and Sadduccees are never mentioned in the OT. Why? Because those heretics never existed until the 400 silent years where the hearts of ruling men were polluted with a religious spirit.
If you have stopped reading and replying to my "stuff", why are you replying to me here? Can't resist a chance to take a few pot shots? As with previous responses in this thread, assertions with no evidence.
I note that nobody has attempted to address my [post=67145776]post #24[/post] this thread where I show that Jesus' teaching on eternal punishment supported the 1st century Jewish view of hell.
ACT 15:5 But there rose up certain of the sect(haresis/heretic) of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
And, for those who think Universalism was a MINORITY belief of the early church, here's a question for thought? Was it a majority belief that just didn't happen to be in the theological School of Rome, the place which birthed the church which killed all who ever disagreed with her.
Do you actually think that Rome or any other entity could literally "kill[] ALL who ever disagreed with her?" I like these "I'm right but all the evidence was destroyed" arguments. The English word "heresy" is derived from the Greek word αἵρεσις, but it did not have the same meaning as the English word.
G139 αἵρεσις hairesis
Thayer Definition:
1) act of taking, capture: e.g. storming a city
2) choosing, choice
3) that which is chosen
4) a body of men following their own tenets (sect or party)
4a) of the Sadducees
4b) of the Pharisees
4c) of the Christians
5) dissensions arising from diversity of opinions and aims
Part of Speech: noun feminine
A Related Word by Thayers/Strongs Number: from G138
Citing in TDNT: 1:180, 27
Thayer Definition:
1) act of taking, capture: e.g. storming a city
2) choosing, choice
3) that which is chosen
4) a body of men following their own tenets (sect or party)
4a) of the Sadducees
4b) of the Pharisees
4c) of the Christians
5) dissensions arising from diversity of opinions and aims
Part of Speech: noun feminine
A Related Word by Thayers/Strongs Number: from G138
Citing in TDNT: 1:180, 27
"According to Edward Beecher, a Congregationalist theologian, there were six theology schools in Christendom during its early years - four were Universalist ( Alexandria , Cesarea, Antioch , and Edessa ). One advocated annihilation ( Ephesus ) and one advocated Eternal Hell (the Latin Church of North Africa). Most of the Universalists throughout Christendom followed the teachings of Origen. Later, Theodore of Mopsuestia had a different theological basis for Universal Salvation, and his view continued in the break-away Church of the East (Nestorian) where his Universalist ideas still exist in its liturgy today.
Source? In which of Beecher's writings did he supposedly say this and what was his source?
Another source stating the same;
"In the first five or six centuries of Christianity there were six theological schools, of which four (Alexandria, Antioch, Caesarea, and Edessa, or Nisibis) were Universalist, one (Ephesus) accepted conditional immortality; one (Carthage or Rome) taught endless punishment of the wicked. Other theological schools are mentioned as founded by Universalists, but their actual doctrine on this subject is not known."
"The Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge"
by Schaff-Herzog, 1908, volume 12, page 96
"Other theological schools are mentioned" where? "Carthage or Rome" That certainly is definitive, which is it? What is the Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge source for these claims or are we supposed to blindly accept them as you do while rejecting such historical sources as the Jewish Encyclopedia and the Talmud which document Jewish beliefs and practices?
I have Allin's book, it is good.
How do you know it is factual? Or is it "good" in your opinion simply because it supports your assumptions/presuppositions.
Upvote
0