Do Non-believers go to Hell 2

Becky153 · Mar 13, 2006

[SIZE=-1]Here it is, from our dictionary:
1.A religious group which denies the essential doctrines of Christianity. The term is usually reserved for groups founded after 1750.
2.[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]A religious group that follows a particular theological system. In the context of Christianity, and in particular, CARM, it is a group that uses the Bible but distorts the doctrines that affect salvation sufficiently to cause salvation to be unattainable. A few examples of cults are Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Science, Christadelphians, Unity, Religious Science, The Way International, and the Moonies. (See also Cults)
(this comes from define: cult on google)
[/SIZE]

bobhope · Mar 13, 2006

Um, I rest my case when I use the FIRST definition from define:cult, which also is unbiased as it doesn't come from an Apologetics website. I mean, come on.

* adherents of an exclusive system of religious beliefs and practices
OK, Christianity fits under this definition.

* fad: an interest followed with exaggerated zeal; "he always follows the latest fads"; "it was all the rage that season"
Christianity fits under this definition as well (though it's arguably too old to be a "fad," its members certainly follow it with "exaggerated zeal").

* a system of religious beliefs and rituals; "devoted to the cultus of the Blessed Virgin"
Wow, surprise, Christianity fits under this definition too.

Let's look at the next definition source, Wikipedia:
* In religion and sociology, a cult is a group of people (often a new religious movement) devoted to beliefs and goals which may be contradictory to those held by the majority of society. Its marginal status may come about either due to its novel belief system or due to idiosyncratic practices that cause the surrounding culture to regard it as far outside the mainstream.
This one may not seem like Christianity fits, but think about it: the majority of people in the world don't follow Christianity. Thus, while the connotation is different in their usage, Christianity fits here too.

Shall I keep going?

AngelusSax · Mar 13, 2006

Christianity fits under this definition as well (though it's arguably too old to be a "fad," its members certainly follow it with "exaggerated zeal").

Well exaggerated zeal is in the eye of the beholder. Many Christians don't follow with enough zeal... or they follow the legalistic side with exaggerated zeal and forget why the Cross was there to begin with... and all points in between and surrounding those two.

Mailman Dan · Mar 14, 2006

[SIZE=-1] 1.A religious group which denies the essential doctrines of Christianity.[/SIZE]

I understand the secular worlds view of what a cult is. However, I was speaking of cults which exist that claim false ties to Christianity. (David Korish was one example)

Matthew 7:15
"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.

Matthew 24:11
and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people.

2 Corinthians 11:13-14

For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

1 Timothy 6:3-5

If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, he is conceited and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions and constant friction between men of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain.

One of the most common reasons so many "cults" exist within Christianity, is that people build a god in their mind that will bend to their ideas. (Universalism is a good example) Rather than belief in the God of scripture, (who they often call a monster) they create a god that would not do what the bible says. It's called "idolatry," and it’s the oldest sin in the Book. The bible says Idolaters will not inherit the kingdom of God. (exactly the reason so many religions exist)

Its why the bible should play a large roll in the believers life. It keeps us from a self-built god, by giving us a glimps of God's glory, and His Justice, and His plans in the future. When a spin off cult from Christianity occures, it has to deny some part of scripture to fit its own gods beliefs. Most of them will deny bibical teachings, or just claim it's a mans teaching, or a translation error in the parts they don't believe.

Dan~~~> believes it to be more common than not

stumpjumper · Mar 14, 2006

Dan

How do you know that fundamentalists are not the "false prophets"?

Considering that fundamentalism emerged in the 1800's and Origen wrote about universalism 1900 years ago, I find it far more likely that the fundamentalists hold the false view...

Cleany · Mar 14, 2006

KCDAD · Mar 14, 2006

Mailman Dan said:
Rather than belief in the God of scripture

This IS the definition of fundamentalism... belief in a object rather than God. The fundamentalist's authority is not truth or love or God... but the scriptures. THAT is idolatry. When you worship a book... your god is the book.

KCDAD · Mar 14, 2006

mailman dan: "When a spin off cult from Christianity occures, it has to deny some part of scripture to fit its own gods beliefs"

Much like Jesus and Paul refute Old Testament Scripture... Sabbath laws, dietary laws, sacrifice laws, prophesy, cleanliness laws, justice... (How many times does Jesus say " you have heard ... but I tell you...")
Those guys! Making up their own religion to fit their ideas of God.

TheGMan · Mar 14, 2006

stumpjumper said:
Considering that fundamentalism emerged in the 1800's and Origen wrote about universalism 1900 years ago, I find it far more likely that the fundamentalists hold the false view...

Nitpick... 1,800 years ago. And I don't think he explicitly came out as universalist but rather evinced that Hell was corrective rather than penal.

stumpjumper · Mar 14, 2006

TheGMan said:
Nitpick... 1,800 years ago. And I don't think he explicitly came out as universalist but rather evinced that Hell was corrective rather than penal.

Yeah. I think I hit the wrong key . But, he pretty much was a strict universalist. Apokatastasis which means "restoration of all things" or the end will be like the beginning was coined by Origen.

He said that since all rational beings came from God in the beginning that the end would be the same...

Mailman Dan · Mar 14, 2006

Much like Jesus and Paul refute Old Testament Scripture... Sabbath laws, dietary laws, sacrifice laws, prophesy, cleanliness laws, justice... (How many times does Jesus say " you have heard ... but I tell you...")
Those guys! Making up their own religion to fit their ideas of God.

The OT was clear that the One who was to come would bring clearity to the law. Jesus was the one that corrected "legalist" who tried to live by the law, but failed to keep the spirit of the law. Jesus showed us that God also judges the thought life and intent, not just the actions.

Matthew 7:22-23
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity

Matthew 5:21-22
“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’
But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire.

1 John 3:15
Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life in him.
.

The fundamentalist's authority is not truth or love or God... but the scriptures.

By your standards, there is no truth in the scriptures, as Universalist (and many various cults) claim they contain many errors, and are written by men in an effort to contorl people. So, by your standards, the only truth one can have is what one makes truth in your mind. Thats, exactly what Idolatry is. (creation in the mind of a god) Without any base.

Dan~~~>believes it rather common

katallasso · Mar 14, 2006

Dan,

You said:

By your standards, there is no truth in the scriptures, as Universalist (and many various cults) claim they contain many errors, and are written by men in an effort to contorl people. So, by your standards, the only truth one can have is what one makes truth in your mind. Thats, exactly what Idolatry is. (creation in the mind of a god) Without any base.

If there was a perfectly good greek word for eternal (aiodios) which was used a few times in the NT by just as many apostles, why wasn't it used to describe "eternal" hellfire?

TheGMan · Mar 14, 2006

katallasso said:
If there was a perfectly good greek word for eternal (aiodios) which was used a few times in the NT by just as many apostles, why wasn't it used to describe "eternal" hellfire?

Or "eternal" life?

Kai apeleusontai outoi eis kolasin aionion hoi de dikaioi eis zoen aionion.

TheGMan · Mar 14, 2006

stumpjumper said:
He said that since all rational beings came from God in the beginning that the end would be the same...

He was also quite careful to hedge his bets and say it was left to the reader to judge the issue...

But whether any of these orders who act under the government of the devil, and obey his wicked commands, will in a future world be converted to righteousness because of their possessing the faculty of freedom of will, or whether persistent and inveterate wickedness may be changed by the power of habit into nature, is a result which you yourself, reader, may approve of, if neither in these present worlds which are seen and temporal, nor in those which are unseen and are eternal, that portion is to differ wholly from the final unity and fitness of things.

Origen and the more explicit exponent of apokatastasis, Gregory of Nyssa, I think, saw it as more a thing to be hoped for than to believe in. In the end, it is surely up to God. Our part is simply to trust that whatever castigation He inflicts upon the sinful is necessary to the ultimate good. We trust God not to inflict unnecessary suffering but it is not given to us to know what is necessary or to judge God or even judge what He in His wisdom should decide.

Yes, I hope there is universal salvation but I do not presume to know it. But - meh - I'm just a humble catechumen.

stumpjumper · Mar 15, 2006

Mailman Dan said:
By your standards, there is no truth in the scriptures, as Universalist (and many various cults) claim they contain many errors, and are written by men in an effort to control people.

Umm. No.

Hans Balthasar does not hold scripture in contempt. Read for yourself: http://www.ratzingerfanclub.com/Balthasar/

What about Richard John Nuehaus?: Let's see:
http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0108/public.html#will
http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0305/articles/dulles.html

Read for yourself...

Also, you never did answer the question. How do you know that it is not the fundamentalists that are the false teachers?

katallasso · Mar 15, 2006

G-Man,

Or "eternal" life?

Exactly, although we do have the spirit of God in us which is eternal.

Mailman Dan · Mar 15, 2006

If there was a perfectly good greek word for eternal (aiodios) which was used a few times in the NT by just as many apostles, why wasn't it used to describe "eternal" hellfire?

Or "eternal" life?

Tell me which translation your using. The word "aiodios" is also used to describe God, but is use to describe judgement and life.

Daniel 12:2
And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, Some to everlasting (aiodios) life, Some to shame and everlasting (aiodios) contempt.

So its simply if you believe that word has a limt, when it does mean age-during. If you believe another Greek or Hebrew word means "eternal" and aiodios does not, please point out which words your using as a basis for that belief.

How do you know that it is not the fundamentalists that are the false teachers?

The very word "fundamental" would imply that we stick to the basics. However, there are false fundies out there who don't believe all of scripture. A handful will tell you the bible is just one guide to God among man, and Jesus is not the only way while claiming a personal relationship with the God of the bible.

You must have a foundation for your beliefs, aside from whats in your mind. A persons mind is subject to change, and your view of God right along with it. The bible says, God does NOT change. It's a false image of god that all of us carry at some point that does.

Dan~~~>places the foundation for beliefs in what the bible says, not in his own personal opinions

stumpjumper · Mar 15, 2006

Mailman Dan said:
The very word "fundamental" would imply that we stick to the basics. However, there are false fundies out there who don't believe all of scripture. A handful will tell you the bible is just one guide to God among man, and Jesus is not the only way while claiming a personal relationship with the God of the bible.

The problem is that you have no problem making strawmen out of some universalist beliefs. There are no "basics" of scripture as the fundamentalist exegesis is just one of many. Many universalists hold scripture in as high of regard as do the fundies.

However, it is most likely the most inaccurate way to read the Bible if you read it in a literal fashion. Most fundies believe in young earth creation and a literal reading of most of Genesis. All of those claims have been proven wrong time and again. One can hold the Bible in very high regard and follow a different interpretation.

If there was a "basic" manner of reading the Bible there would not be thousands of Christian denominations that claim to be Bible based and yet disagree on some very important issues.

I have met fundamentalist Arminians and Calvinists and the only similiarity between their theologies is that they claim to base it upon an inerrant scripture.

Dan~~~>places the foundation for beliefs in what the bible says, not in his own personal opinions

And I guarantee I could find at least a thousand other fundamentalists that believe their theology is founded upon the Bible and disagree with much of what you believe.

stumpjumper · Mar 15, 2006

TheGMan said:
Yes, I hope there is universal salvation but I do not presume to know it. But - meh - I'm just a humble catechumen.

Indeed. I do not think that universal salvation is the neccesary eschatalogical goal of creation and of all things. I do not know and that is made clear by any of the universalists that I read (Balthasarm, Nuehaus, or Karl Rahner to a lesser extent).

To them it is something that we can hope for and pray for but not something that is a neccesary end for creation...

Soul Searcher · Mar 15, 2006

Mailman Dan said:
Tell me which translation your using. The word "aiodios" is also used to describe God, but is use to describe judgement and life.

Daniel 12:2
And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, Some to everlasting (aiodios) life, Some to shame and everlasting (aiodios) contempt.

Thats odd considering that Daniel was not written in Greek. What transaltion are you using?

Do Non-believers go to Hell 2

Veteran

Active Member

Believe

Well-Known Member

Left the river, made it to the sea

&amp;amp;quot;I desire mercy, not sacrifice&amp;am

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Follower of Jesus of Nazareth

Left the river, made it to the sea

Well-Known Member

God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Him

Follower of Jesus of Nazareth

Follower of Jesus of Nazareth

Left the river, made it to the sea

God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Him

Well-Known Member

Left the river, made it to the sea

Left the river, made it to the sea

The kingdom is within

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency

&quot;I desire mercy, not sacrifice&am