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.
the hell described by the parable of lazerus and the rich man have all of the same similarities of a lake burning with fire. Fire regardless of it's locality will still burn and hurt you. That is why most don't differentiate the two, and both are called the same term "hell" typically throughout history of the church, including the church fathers.
can you quote the specific verse in numbers 15? I would like to look at it. As far as torturing, again Hell is logically a coherent punishment based on that sheer number of crimes commited. over 30,000 for a moral person, more likely there is over 100,000 or a million sins in a typical life time. And this would not be punished by a mere prison. The punishment in this macro does not fit the crime.Well, consider that God required capital punishment for all sorts of offenses. For instance, there is a case of a man gathering sticks on a Saturday, in Numbers 15, who was killed for his offense.
So, not only is God resorting to killing for trivial offenses, he is also punishing people by torture for all eternity! That trumps all of the evil dictators that humanity has ever known. There, God is in a class by himself.
Yes, I understand that, and you and I have already briefly argued over that kind of thing long ago, something I won't (and can't) do with you here.
Start at verse 32.can you quote the specific verse in numbers 15? I would like to look at it.
As far as torturing, again Hell is logically a coherent punishment based on that sheer number of crimes commited.
In the OP I mention the dangers of making spiritual allegory as a norm for Biblical interpretation. If God was to make an instruction manual for any reason, why make it not straight forward, why use allegory at all? Unless it's for poetic reason or some other exception to the rule. It just does not make sense for God to confuse us.
Well, if the book of Revelation ISN'T figurative in its language, its use of symbolism, or allegorical in nature to at least some extent, then I guess we can expect a real-life version of something along the lines of a GODZILLA movie to come to life ... and that doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever, especially when I put my hermeneutical reading glasses on ...
If it's so easy to decode, then everyone would know which 'other' books to reference and most Christians would be on the same interpretive frequency as to which form of Eschatology to affirm and uphold. But, we don't find that to be the case with the book of Revelation, now do we?I personally don't think revelation is allegorical, at least not as a whole. There are some symbols used, but they are easily decoded when using other books as the key to the code.
That type of symbolism is meant to hide truth. The parts of the Bible that speak of the gospel, and prophecy and history those are in plain truths, but revelation as well as some of the parables were meant to be revealed to veterans of the faith. Some truths of scripture are so deep that to even mention them is to be ridiculed on the open forums. These are called the meat of scripture, versus the milk of scripture. But overall, the Bible is literal. And even in allegorical books, like revelation, it's still 95% literal, with some symbols. It's just that the symbols are more frequent.
It was a well known law that working on the sabbath was a violation of the law, the man picking up sticks knew it, and was in subordination. Again if God make a human being, literally gives them life, He can take that life away.Start at verse 32.
let me go ahead and repost from post one, since we are repeating. I hope you don't mind. hat I see that has not been refuted is this one: "why would God send someone to infinite hell, for finite sins?" When a skeptic asks this question they assume that they have won. Because most of the time they do win. But not this time. See our soul is spirit. Not physical. So without mass according to the theory of relativity, there is no time. So our souls are eternal by default according to known science, that is not even incorporating meta physics at that point. So technically all actions are performed by our eternal souls. Every hate filled word, every fear, every lust. It's all stamped in eternity. Because sin itself, is eternal, it must be punished eternally. Eternal hell is not a long time. It's outside of time and space. That is why I don't think the geocentric hell is really hell. Some guys believe hell is in the core of the earth. I don't think we need a physical molten fire at all, hell will be spiritually empowered. It could in fact be enflamed by God's glory itself upon sin. We don't know. That is the first part of the logical case for hell, and the strongest. The second part of this is to describe why would God send us to hell in general, why not just a prison or something else?What sin deserves an eternal conscious torment? For eternity, mind you.
Think about it. Let's imagine you are given a button, and as long as you are pressing it, you are causing Hitler to suffer. To stop the suffering, you need to release the button. How long do you keep the button? After several weeks? Months? years? Imagine also having a window, where you can observe the torture you are inflicting on Hitler.
I can appreciate the fact that the first few weeks/months may be pleasant. You are giving Hitler his due, for the suffering he inflicted on millions of other people! But then the suffering continues. It has now been months and even years. And you are still pressing the button. At what point do you stop?
If you never stop, and you feel justified in inflicting torture, then what does that make you? The most loving human being?
Again if God make a human being, literally gives them life, He can take that life away.
let me go ahead and repost from post one, since we are repeating.
You say it has not been refuted but you ignored my question when you posted this. You need to demonstrate that a soul exists before you can use it for any explanation you have. You have assumed a soul instead of demonstrating with sufficient evidence that it does exist.It was a well known law that working on the sabbath was a violation of the law, the man picking up sticks knew it, and was in subordination. Again if God make a human being, literally gives them life, He can take that life away.
let me go ahead and repost from post one, since we are repeating. I hope you don't mind. hat I see that has not been refuted is this one: "why would God send someone to infinite hell, for finite sins?" When a skeptic asks this question they assume that they have won. Because most of the time they do win. But not this time. See our soul is spirit. Not physical.
It was a well known law that working on the sabbath was a violation of the law, the man picking up sticks knew it, and was in subordination
You say it has not been refuted but you ignored my question when you posted this. You need to demonstrate that a soul exists before you can use it for any explanation you have. You have assumed a soul instead of demonstrating with sufficient evidence that it does exist.
In which case, use of the word soul is obviated.I like your question about soul. I'd like to further expound on it, by asking what happens to a soul when a person sleeps or has general anesthesia? What happens to a soul when a person is in a coma?
It seems to me that a 'soul' just does whatever the body is doing. The two are the same.
In which case, use of the word soul is obviated.
That is why I don't say we don't have one. There is no reasonable evidence to warrant belief in a soul. That's it.To fully obviate the concept of a "soul," particularly in biblical terms, one would need to thoroughly vet out the historical and etymological development of the concept from its primitive origins(s) [plural] and then make a conclusion. And I don't think you, nor @BigV or @Clizby WampusCat have done that.
And then we'd have put the icing on the cake by "assuming" that psychological sciences have thoroughly and in utter comprehensively discovered and identified the complete functions and essences of whatever is really going on the any one human brain. Somehow, I think that is a huge leap to make, even if I do like science myself.
That is why I don't say we don't have one. There is no reasonable evidence to warrant belief in a soul. That's it.
A parent does not give life because a parent did not create the life they have, so how can they give it?Literally, a parent gives life to a child. You know this is true by a simple experiment. Just have a devout Christian woman, who is virgin, ask God to give her a child and I guarantee you that nothing will happen, without either natural or artificial insemination.
are you saying that abortion is murder? If you believe so, then I can understand your concern.And, secondly, I want to ask you a question. Why is it that modern medicine doesn't accept the premise that God takes away life today?
If a devout believer hears the voice of God telling them to kill their children, we, as a society, don't just accept it, but place such people in mental institutions and place their children, if they are minors, in a protective custody.
Islam kills their christian that were converted children all the time. Parents kill babies in the womb because they are a financial burden, or because they want more starbucks. So there is a lot of murder, in fact 2000 babies are aborted daily through no fault of their own but usually because of a parents finances. But lets address this question honestly. In the new testament, God does not speak to us anymore audibly. If we were in a day and age where God verbally spoke to us, then this would be a concern. But the Bible says that in the latter days God would speak through Christ. Hebrews 1:2. And they would never say to kill someone, as they are simply relaying prophetic or future messages, not exhortation. Here is a commentary confirming my interpretation of hebrews 1:2 that God no longer audibly speaks to men, but uses the word of God and the spiritual gifts. '1:2 The periodic, partial, and differential prophecies of the OT have now been overshadowed by God’s preeminent and final revelation in the person of His Son. The prophets were only channels through whom the divine word was communicated. The Lord Jesus Christ is Himself the final revelation of God to men. As John said, “No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him” (John 1:18). The Lord Jesus said concerning Himself, “He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (John 14:9). Christ speaks not only for God but as God."- Bible Knowledge commentary.Should we allow parents who hear God telling them to kill children to kill their children?
As you may know, from the Old Testament, asking people to kill their child IS something a God can ask, based on the story of Abraham and Isaac.
Well thank you. I think this is a compliment. I find it encouraging that my faith has caused my dogma to be consistent with my walk. I try to do that as best I can, I am not perfect by any means, and I have a long way to go. Just yesterday I was sitting on the couch and my heart was hard, I was thinking, I must be really smart. And I was just gloating, in cases like this, I have a document that I read that has all of my character flaws (mostly authored by my wife, just kidding). But if someone wants to be humble, just ask their wife what their flaws are. That should take care of that. So I jotted some of them down, it's about two pages now. And I was still hard hearted. At that point I just started praying my prayer list from the top, and I realized that prayer sometimes is the only way to stay soft hearted and pliable for God to use. As I was praying I realized that so many of my requests are out of my control. I cannot control the future economy, or the housing market, or how long our cars will last, or my job security, I cannot do any of that, I cannot control if I get in a car accident by someone elses fault. That is why it is so important to know where you are going when you die. If there is a hell, I do not want to go there. In fact there is a study called pascals wager. Basically it says it's better to live a good life, because it may help you get out of hell, than it would to not live a good life. Because you have two fold payment, living a good life has rewards of it's own, and plus getting eternal life.I think you are one of the believers that there is absolutely nothing a God can do that would make him unjust. Therefore, you've ceded your reasoning capabilities to your religious dogma. That makes you a perfect religion follower (where you are just doing what you are told), but also someone who is very difficult to reason with.
How can God give life, if he needs a sperm and an egg?A parent does not give life because a parent did not create the life they have, so how can they give it?
are you saying that abortion is murder? If you believe so, then I can understand your concern.
How can God give life, if he needs a sperm and an egg?
That's what you got from what I said previously? Okay then. Have a good one.
But if someone wants to be humble, just ask their wife what their flaws are. That should take care of that.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?