Is not believing in an eternal hell Heresy?

[Rhamiel]

Evidently, a lot of people are rethinking old ideas about hell.
Interesting.

there is nothing new under the sun
all is vanity
people reject the wisdom handed down from age to age and take up new and novel doctrines because it makes them feel smart

"oh those primitive people believed in hell, but we are sooooo much more advanced now"
it is about stroking their egos, not about Divine Revelation

 

[Rick Otto]

I have not the dang foggiest. Do you?

Hebrew:

How to say clarity in Hebrew?

Greek:
English-Greek translation :: clarity :: Dictionary

 

[Timothew]

This sounds exactly like what Timothew has been saying.

It is. What Coffee posted proves that Irenaeus did not believe that the souls of those who reject God will continue to exist forever.

 

[Timothew]

I haven't said that believing that the wicked will perish is a heresy. You slander me by saying that I've said something which I haven't.

I believe the wicked will perish, because the Bible says so. However, it's not about perishing in the sense of being annihilated. One is perishing if he's in hell, but it doesn't mean he ceases to exist because of that.

The word "perish" in John 3:16 is in verb form.

Timothew, do you believe the wicked will literally go up in smoke?

"And the Lord said unto Moses, Go down, charge the people, lest they break through unto the Lord to gaze, and many of them perish." (Exodus 19:21)

Would they have been annihilated if they gazed upon the Lord there?

"Then it shall be, if you by any means forget the Lord your God, and follow other gods, and serve them and worship them, I testify against you this day that you shall surely perish." (Deuteronomy 8:19 NKJV)

Were Aaron and the other Israelites who worshipped the golden calf annihilated when they did that?

I already quoted Matthew 8:25 where the disciples are in a tempest.

"Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him." (John 3:36 ESV)

It doesn't say "the wrath of God remains on him, but only until God choses to annihilate him"

It says "remains on him", which means it must also remain after he dies, thus he cannot be annihilated. For how can someone who doesn't exist be under God's wrath?

Annihilationism is the belief that the wicked will perish instead of being subjected to eternal conscious torment in hell. Since the Bible says that the wicked will perish, Annihilationism is not a heresy.

 

[MoreCoffee]

It is. What Coffee posted proves that Irenaeus did not believe that the souls of those who reject God will continue to exist forever.

What I posted shows that saint Ireneaus taught against heresies such as annihilationism. That is, after all, the name of his book "Against Heresies" and the section I quoted was a section arguing for the immortality of the soul. He wrote:

4. But as the animal body is certainly not itself the soul, yet has fellowship with the soul as long as God pleases; so the soul herself is not life, but partakes in that life bestowed upon her by God. Wherefore also the prophetic word declares of the first-formed man, He became a living soul, Genesis 2:7 teaching us that by the participation of life the soul became alive; so that the soul, and the life which it possesses, must be understood as being separate existences. When God therefore bestows life and perpetual duration, it comes to pass that even souls which did not previously exist should henceforth endure [for ever], since God has both willed that they should exist, and should continue in existence. For the will of God ought to govern and rule in all things, while all other things give way to Him, are in subjection, and devoted to His service. Thus far, then, let me speak concerning the creation and the continued duration of the soul.​

 

[By Faith Alone]

What I posted shows that saint Ireneaus taught against heresies such as annihilationism. That is, after all, the name of his book "Against Heresies" and the section I quoted was a section arguing for the immortality of the soul.

Do you prefer that which the Early church "fathers" wrote or Scriptural revelation?

 

[By Faith Alone]

there is nothing new under the sun
all is vanity
people reject the wisdom handed down from age to age and take up new and novel doctrines because it makes them feel smart

"oh those primitive people believed in hell, but we are sooooo much more advanced now"
it is about stroking their egos, not about Divine Revelation

Acts 17:11 These (Bereans) were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

You are a big man. You can tough it out.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Do you prefer that which the Early church "fathers" wrote or Scriptural revelation?

I prefer posts that do not use bold and multiple colours.

 

[shturt678s]

Never knew this thread would become so popular here.

I have never learned so much orthodoxy purging heresy in such a short time....had to purchase more note pads especially due to MC sagacious truths, going to bill him for the pads...nothing personal...others also have contributed.

Old Jack looking for another pen...out of ink.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I have never learned so much orthodoxy purging heresy in such a short time....had to purchase more note pads especially due to MC sagacious truths, going to bill him for the pads...nothing personal...others also have contributed.

Old Jack looking for another pen...out of ink.

As long as the bill is as virtual as the pads I don't mind

 

[By Faith Alone]

I prefer posts that do not use bold and multiple colours.

You must be getting tired. You are beginning to see things.


I am sorry. I did not know I was the only one to "bold". I can see my bold much better. Thank you.

 

[MoreCoffee]

You must be getting tired. You are beginning to see things.


I am sorry. I did not know I was the only one to "bold". I can see my bold much better. Thank you.

I can see bold better too, and big fonts, and some colours look better too. Weeeeeeeeeee

 

[By Faith Alone]

I can see bold better too, and big fonts, and some colours look better too. Weeeeeeeeeee

Post 446 set your hat to spinning?

 

[Rick Otto]

Do you prefer that which the Early church "fathers" wrote or Scriptural revelation?

Whatever supports the favorite,ancient, and ever popular c------t theory.
Can I ask you to buy a book? It's probably under $10 used. It is called "Papal Sin-Structures of Deceit" by Garry Wills, a Catholic who is or was, a history professor at Northwestern University.
He has a chapter called "Marian Politics" that exposes motives. It starts out with:
"One support of the celebate system has bot been considered yet - the Virgin Mary. Modern popes tell priests to think of themselves as virgin's consecrated to the Virgin. The study of the priesthood mentioned earlier - the one American bishops commissioned, and then canceled when they saw where it was going - found this trait in seminarians: "Mother dominance, or a prevalence of a dominant unconscious mother image (an idealized view of women)." It is often said that Mary enhances the dignity of women. But for misogynists an idealized mother is both safe in herself and an alternative to lesser women. THE Virgin is repeatedly used to prevent the ordination of women - if Mary was not a priest, how can they be?"

Check out the reviews of it on Amazon.

 

[Timothew]

What I posted shows that saint Ireneaus taught against heresies such as annihilationism. That is, after all, the name of his book "Against Heresies" and the section I quoted was a section arguing for the immortality of the soul. He wrote:

4. But as the animal body is certainly not itself the soul, yet has fellowship with the soul as long as God pleases; so the soul herself is not life, but partakes in that life bestowed upon her by God. Wherefore also the prophetic word declares of the first-formed man, He became a living soul, Genesis 2:7 teaching us that by the participation of life the soul became alive; so that the soul, and the life which it possesses, must be understood as being separate existences. When God therefore bestows life and perpetual duration, it comes to pass that even souls which did not previously exist should henceforth endure [for ever], since God has both willed that they should exist, and should continue in existence. For the will of God ought to govern and rule in all things, while all other things give way to Him, are in subjection, and devoted to His service. Thus far, then, let me speak concerning the creation and the continued duration of the soul.​

And you assume that Annihilationism is a heresy, yet Irenaeus wrote that those who reject God will deprive himself of [the privilege of] continuance for ever and ever. Irenaeus is saying that those who reject God will NOT continue to exist forever in hell being tormented alive.

 

[MoreCoffee]

And you assume that Annihilationism is a heresy, yet Irenaeus wrote that those who reject God will deprive himself of [the privilege of] continuance for ever and ever. Irenaeus is saying that those who reject God will NOT continue to exist forever in hell being tormented alive.

It is not an assumption for me, my Church treats it as a heresy. My church teaches as dogma that God's punishment of the wicked is everlasting. This teaching follows the teaching of Jesus Christ in Matthew chapter twenty five verse forty six. One catholic commentator said (in the nineteenth century):

Matthew 25:46

Everlasting punishment. The rewards and torments of a future life are declared by Jesus Christ, who is truth itself, to be eternal. Let no one be found to argue hence against the goodness and mercy of God, for punishing sins committed in time with punishments that are eternal. For

1. according to human laws, we see forgery and other crimes punished by death, which is in some measure an eternal exclusion from society.
2. The will of the sinner is such, that he would sin eternally continuing if he could; it is an eternal God, a God of infinite majesty, who is offended. He essentially hates sin; and as, in hell there is no redemption, the sin eternally continuing, the hatred God bears to sin must eternally continue, and with it eternal punishment.

The doctrine of those who pretend, with Origen, to question the eternity of the duration of hell's torments; who can say with him, video infernum quasi senescentum, must encourage vice and embolden the sinner; for if the conviction of eternal torments is not capable to restrain his malice, the doctrine of temporal punishment would be a much less restraint. The present world would not be habitable, were there nothing for the wicked to apprehend after this life. There are many questions often proposed with regard to the situation and nature of hell-fire, &c. &c. &c. but in all these and similar objects of curiosity, it is best to adhere to the sage reflection of St. Augustine: "When we dispute upon a point very obscure, without any clear and certain documents from the holy Scripture, the presumption of man should stop short, and lean not more to one than the other side." (lib. ii. de pecc. meritis et remiss. chap. xxxvi. ep. 190. ad Optat. chap. v. No. 16.)

On a recapitulation of this long and most interesting discourse, we may observe, that in the first place, it treats of those wars and persecutions which are to happen in the latter ages of the world; that it next proceeds to describe the heresies and schisms among Christians; the general propagation of the gospel; the great apostacy at the time of the Antichrist; and lastly, the grand and closing scene of the day of judgment. Thus these grand and momentous events are intimately connected with each other, and all materially regard the Church of Christ.​

 

[Angelquill]

It is not an assumption for me, my Church treats it as a heresy. My church teaches as dogma that God's punishment of the wicked is everlasting. This teaching follows the teaching of Jesus Christ in Matthew chapter twenty five verse forty six. One catholic commentator said (in the nineteenth century):

Matthew 25:46

Everlasting punishment. The rewards and torments of a future life are declared by Jesus Christ, who is truth itself, to be eternal. Let no one be found to argue hence against the goodness and mercy of God, for punishing sins committed in time with punishments that are eternal. For

1. according to human laws, we see forgery and other crimes punished by death, which is in some measure an eternal exclusion from society.
2. The will of the sinner is such, that he would sin eternally continuing if he could; it is an eternal God, a God of infinite majesty, who is offended. He essentially hates sin; and as, in hell there is no redemption, the sin eternally continuing, the hatred God bears to sin must eternally continue, and with it eternal punishment.

The doctrine of those who pretend, with Origen, to question the eternity of the duration of hell's torments; who can say with him, video infernum quasi senescentum, must encourage vice and embolden the sinner; for if the conviction of eternal torments is not capable to restrain his malice, the doctrine of temporal punishment would be a much less restraint. The present world would not be habitable, were there nothing for the wicked to apprehend after this life. There are many questions often proposed with regard to the situation and nature of hell-fire, &c. &c. &c. but in all these and similar objects of curiosity, it is best to adhere to the sage reflection of St. Augustine: "When we dispute upon a point very obscure, without any clear and certain documents from the holy Scripture, the presumption of man should stop short, and lean not more to one than the other side." (lib. ii. de pecc. meritis et remiss. chap. xxxvi. ep. 190. ad Optat. chap. v. No. 16.)

On a recapitulation of this long and most interesting discourse, we may observe, that in the first place, it treats of those wars and persecutions which are to happen in the latter ages of the world; that it next proceeds to describe the heresies and schisms among Christians; the general propagation of the gospel; the great apostacy at the time of the Antichrist; and lastly, the grand and closing scene of the day of judgment. Thus these grand and momentous events are intimately connected with each other, and all materially regard the Church of Christ.
​

Yes, but, MC....
Not all of us are Catholics.
It is fine if you are, and if you think that not believing in eternal torment is heresy...but you don't get to impose that thinking on everyone else.
That sort of thing is why there are Protestants in the first place.
The days of Inquisitions are over. Your church's authority as to what is or is not heresy is limited to your own congregations.
I do not recognize your church or your pope as any authority over me or over what I am to believe or think, nor does anyone else who is not a member of your church.
That's just the way it is.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Yes, but, MC....
Not all of us are Catholics.
It is fine if you are, and if you think that not believing in eternal torment is heresy...but you don't get to impose that thinking on everyone else.
That sort of thing is why there are Protestants in the first place.
The days of Inquisitions are over. Your church's authority as to what is or is not heresy is limited to your own congregations.
I do not recognize your church or your pope as any authority over me or over what I am to believe or think, nor does anyone else who is not a member of your church.
That's just the way it is.

What others teach on this matter is of lesser significance to me than what I believe and what my Church teaches. So when I argue in favour of my own beliefs it is not imposing anything on others; if you prefer to believe in annihilation and if you prefer to think that God would be cruel if punishment for wickedness is everlasting then that is your choice. You are free to believe or not believe whatever you like. The point of a debating forum is to present the case for those things that you think are true. That is what I did in the post you you've responded to but you've chosen not to respond to the content of the post rather you have written a complaint against me stating what I believe. Good luck to you if you think that will persuade anybody.

 

[Jonathan95]

Annihilationism is the belief that the wicked will perish instead of being subjected to eternal conscious torment in hell. Since the Bible says that the wicked will perish, Annihilationism is not a heresy.

That's not a real reply to my post. To perish is not the same as being annihilated, read my post and reply.

 

[Angelquill]

What others teach on this matter is of lesser significance to me than what I believe and what my Church teaches. So when I argue in favour of my own beliefs it is not imposing anything on others; if you prefer to believe in annihilation and if you prefer to think that God would be cruel if punishment for wickedness is everlasting then that is your choice. You are free to believe or not believe whatever you like. The point of a debating forum is to present the case for those things that you think are true. That is what I did in the post you you've responded to but you've chosen not to respond to the content of the post rather you have written a complaint against me stating what I believe. Good luck to you if you think that will persuade anybody.

No, what I have done is to state what I believe. Or rather what I do not believe.
If you truly want to persuade others that your position is the correct one, you'd do better to do it from scripture, rather than "my church teaches".
Most churches do teach eternal torment, actually
So the point is kind of lost on people who are rethinking these ancient ideas.