Is not believing in an eternal hell Heresy?

[Targaryen]

I agree, we should not base this on Gut Feelings, but on Scripture.

Mark the blameless and behold the upright,
for there is a future for the man of peace.
But transgressors shall be altogether destroyed;
the future of the wicked shall be cut off.
Psalm 37:37-38

My "gut feeling" is that we should believe what the Bible says instead of an empty tradition that claims that transgressors will not be destroyed but they will instead be preserved forever in hell so that they can be tormented forever. Which is something the Bible never says. But sometimes established traditions win out over truth, for a while...

Still going on your own "gut" there as well, based on your own interpretation of scripture.

0-2...who's next?

 

[Mama Kidogo]

Nm

 

[Timothew]

Still going on your own "gut" there as well, based on your own interpretation of scripture.

0-2...who's next?

Excuse me, but how so?

I believe what it says, and it says exactly what I believe. It directly contradicts the doctrine of eternal torture. Please explain.

Mark the blameless and behold the upright,
for there is a future for the man of peace.
But transgressors shall be altogether destroyed;
the future of the wicked shall be cut off.
Psalm 37:37-38

 

[Mama Kidogo]

Excuse me, but how so?

I believe what it says, and it says exactly what I believe. It directly contradicts the doctrine of eternal torture. Please explain.

Mark the blameless and behold the upright,
for there is a future for the man of peace.
But transgressors shall be altogether destroyed;
the future of the wicked shall be cut off.
Psalm 37:37-38

Torture of punishment?

 

[Timothew]

Torture of punishment?

What? It says that transgressors will be destroyed. Their punishment is destruction, not eternal torture. This is what it says "transgressors shall be altogether destroyed", I don't know how you managed to get that so completely wrong.

 

[Mama Kidogo]

What? It says that transgressors will be destroyed. Their punishment is destruction, not eternal torture. This is what it says "transgressors shall be altogether destroyed", I don't know how you managed to get that so completely wrong.

What do you mean i got it wrong? I asked a question. You are the one that used the word torture. Pretty sure i quoted you saying it.
So I ask again, is it torture or punishment? The Orthodox view, that is.

 

[Angelquill]

The rule I'm speaking of has nothing to do with CF rules but is one of your own making. I'm speaking of your insistence that the Orthodox and Catholic refrain from sharing what the church teaches and use Scripture only. A rule btw that you do not follow yourself as your basing your view on a feeling.
So if it really bothers you to hear what the church teaches, I think you'll need to put the Orthodox and Catholics on ignore. It's what we do. We look to the church as Christ is the head
Also, this is not a formal debate. It's a discussion.

I see the inquisition did go on behind my back while I slept.
Nice.
Okay...what I said was that nobody who is not Catholic is going to be impressed with what your church teaches. What I said is that if you truly want to persuade someone else who is not Catholic that your view is the correct one, you'd do better to use Scripture than church tradition.

I also said that I very freely admit that my heart is very much involved in my faith. I have no problem with you telling me that.

Now, if you want to continue to tell everyone that their thoughts about eternal punishment do not line up with what your church teaches, that is up to you...me, I would be much more impressed if you had more heart in your faith and less church tradition...but that is between you and God, not you and me.
As, by the way, is my own relationship with Him.

Just let me remind you, one more time, that the Catholic church does not have the authority any more to tell anyone outside of it what heresy is, or what it isn't.
The Middle Ages are over. No one trembles at the thought that the Catholics might get you if you don't watch out any more.
Just thought you might like to know...

 

[Hammster]

ADMIN HAT ON



The statement of faith states:

Discussions about Nicene and Trinitarian beliefs may take place in the orthodox Christians only
forums, all discussions regarding non-Nicene and non-Trinitarian topics will take place in the Unorthodox Doctrinal Discussion forum. Those topics include (but are not limited to)

● Universalism
● Open Theism
● Full Preterism
● Trinitarianism
● Annihilationism


Due to nature of this discussion, it's been moved from General Theology to UDD.

ADMIN HAT OFF

 

[Timothew]

What do you mean i got it wrong? I asked a question. You are the one that used the word torture. Pretty sure i quoted you saying it.
So I ask again, is it torture or punishment? The Orthodox view, that is.

The "Orthodox" view is that it is punishment, and that punishment is eternal torment. If you want to claim that setting someone on fire and keeping them on fire forever is not torture but is instead an effective punishment, I would like to see your evidence.

I'm saying that you have gotten Psalm 37:38 wrong by denying that the punishment is destruction and agreeing with the so called "Orthodox" view that the wicked will not be destroyed but they will be eternally punished by being tormented alive forever. The Bible says that they will be eternally punished by being destroyed. I don't understand how you could have gotten this so completely wrong.

 

[Mama Kidogo]

I see the inquisition did go on behind my back while I slept.
Nice.
Okay...what I said was that nobody who is not Catholic is going to be impressed with what your church teaches. What I said is that if you truly want to persuade someone else who is not Catholic that your view is the correct one, you'd do better to use Scripture than church tradition.

I also said that I very freely admit that my heart is very much involved in my faith. I have no problem with you telling me that.

Now, if you want to continue to tell everyone that their thoughts about eternal punishment do not line up with what your church teaches, that is up to you...me, I would be much more impressed if you had more heart in your faith and less church tradition...but that is between you and God, not you and me.
As, by the way, is my own relationship with Him.

Just let me remind you, one more time, that the Catholic church does not have the authority any more to tell anyone outside of it what heresy is, or what it isn't.
The Middle Ages are over. No one trembles at the thought that the Catholics might get you if you don't watch out any more.
Just thought you might like to know...

Not being a Catholic, this doesn't apply to me. How I post and who I affect is not yours to decide. I'm not here to impress you or anyone. I'm here to share my faith and thoughts.

No matter. This thread has now been properly moved to where it belongs so I'll be unsubscribing.

 

[Timothew]

The Nicene Creed says nothing about eternal conscious torment. I'm just saying.
CF supports the following as a statement of faith:


The Nicene Creed (with scriptural references)

We believe in (Romans 10:8-10; 1John 4:15)
ONE God, (Deuteronomy 6:4, Ephesians 4:6)
the Father (Matthew 6:9)
Almighty, (Exodus 6:3)
Maker of Heaven and Earth, (Genesis 1:1)
and of all things visible and invisible. (Colossians 1:15-16)

And in ONE Lord Jesus Christ, (Acts 11:17)
the Son of God, (Mathew 14:33; 16:16)
the Only-Begotten, (John 1:18; 3:16)
Begotten of the Father before all ages. (John 1:2)
Light of Light; (Psalm 27:1; John 8:12; Matthew 17:2,5)
True God of True God; (John 17:1-5)
Begotten, not made; (John 1:18)
of one essence with the Father (John 10:30)
by whom all things were made; (Hebrews 1:1-2)
Who for us men and for our salvation (1Timothy 2:4-5)
came down from Heaven, (John 6:33,35)
and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, (Luke 1:35)
and became man. (John 1:14)
And was crucified for us (Mark 15:25; 1Cointhians 15:3)
under Pontius Pilate, (John 19:6)
and suffered, (Mark 8:31)
and was buried. (Luke 23:53; 1Corinthians 15:4)
And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures. (Luke 24:1 1Corinthians 15:4)
And ascended into Heaven, (Luke 24:51; Acts 1:10)
and sits at the right hand of the Father. (Mark 16:19; Acts 7:55)
And He shall come again with glory (Matthew 24:27)
to judge the living and the dead; (Acts 10:42; 2Timothy 4:1)
whose Kingdom shall have no end. (2 Peter 1:11)

And in the Holy Spirit, (John 14:26)
the Lord, (Acts 5:3-4)v
the Giver of Life, (Genesis 1:2)
Who proceeds from the Father; (John 15:26)
Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; (Matthew 3:16-17)
Who spoke through the prophets. (1 Samuel 19:20 ; Ezekiel 11:5,13)

In one, (Matthew 16: 18)
holy, (1 Peter 2:5,9)
catholic*, (Mark 16:15)
and apostolic Church. (Acts 2:42; Ephesians 2:19-22)

I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins**. (Ephesians 4:5; Acts 2:38)
I look for the resurrection of the dead, (John 11:24; 1Corinthians 15:12-49; Hebrews 6:2; Revelation 20:5)
and the life of the world to come. (Mark 10:29-30)
AMEN. (Psalm 106:48)

*The word "catholic" (literally, "complete," "universal," or "according to the whole") refers to the universal church of the Lord Jesus Christ and not necessarily or exclusively to any particular visible denomination, institution, or doctrine.

**May be interpreted as baptism is a matter of obedience and not a requirement for salvation or as a regenerating ordinance.

 

[Timothew]

Not being a Catholic, this doesn't apply to me. How I post and who I affect is not yours to decide. I'm not here to impress you or anyone. I'm here to share my faith and thoughts.

No matter. This thread has now been properly moved to where it belongs so I'll be unsubscribing.

See you later. It was nice talking to you and I'm sorry that I couldn't get you to understand.

 

[Mama Kidogo]

The "Orthodox" view is that it is punishment, and that punishment is eternal torment. If you want to claim that setting someone on fire and keeping them on fire forever is not torture but is instead an effective punishment, I would like to see your evidence.

I'm saying that you have gotten Psalm 37:38 wrong by denying that the punishment is destruction and agreeing with the so called "Orthodox" view that the wicked will not be destroyed but they will be eternally punished by being tormented alive forever. The Bible says that they will be eternally punished by being destroyed. I don't understand how you could have gotten this so completely wrong.

Who said anything about literal fire? Might be good to bone up on the Orthodox view. We see God's love upon those who hate him "as a" consuming fire.

 

[Mama Kidogo]

See you later. It was nice talking to you and I'm sorry that I couldn't get you to understand.

My friend , I do understand. I just don't agree. It's been a pleasure speaking with you on this matter. You've been polite and engaging.

 

[Timothew]

Who said anything about literal fire? Might be good to bone up on the Orthodox view. We see God's love upon those who hate him "as a" consuming fire.

"A Consuming Fire"? That is also what I believe.

However I believe that the consuming fire actually consumes what it burns. Who can be destroyed by God and still live?

 

[Angelquill]

Okay, here is your entire post with my entire post in the quote above. I made your "Yes." bold because it was the part of your post that directly answered my question, specifically I asked "Do you believe that?". Since you said "Yes." That was the relevant part of your reply, the rest was just verbiage to mitigate the "Yes." and to obfuscate the meaning of the "Yes.". If you really didn't mean "Yes." then you should not have said it. Perhaps you intended "Sort of, but only with these half dozen qualifications because basically I like annihilationism way more than I like what Jesus says in Matthew 25:46", but I suspect you would not like to say that, so you said "Yes." and then added half a dozen qualifications to make your Yes mean No. Anyway, I think my previous reply to your "Yes." was more favourable to your position. Your qualifications only make what you said in that "Yes." vacuous.

By the way, I am not attempting to be irenic, I gave up on that after you constantly called Catholics and Catholic teaching all sorts of unpleasant things. And after you spent four or five posts nodding to the absurd accusations made by "By Faith Alone" against the Catholic Church. It is evident that accurate presentation of Catholic beliefs is not part of the plan for By Faith Alone's posts and I think the same is true of your posts. I hope that can be corrected by yourself. There's nothing good about misrepresenting what I believe and what the Catholic Church teaches. Just as there's nothing good about eviscerating what Jesus says in Matthew 25:46.

Cheers.

And to think I slept so well...
Look, you misunderstood me. I tried to tell you that the Catholic church no longer has the authority to tell people outside of the church what is heresy and what is not. It is not the Middle Ages any more...at least not among the rest of Christendom.
I believe that I said that I have a great deal of respect for the pope, and I think he's a great guy, and all that, but that I do not recognize his authority over me at all.
You may accurately present what your church teaches all you like, that's your business...and my attitude is going to be "so what"?
I have nothing whatsoever against the Catholic church...well, except for some of your history. I would do anything to avoid giving you back the authority that you once had. You would only abuse it again, as you have proven.
Now, individual Catholics are quite a different story. In fact one of my best friends teaches Catholic school up in Pennsylvania. She is a great lady. We don't always agree, but she is okay with that, and so am I.
Not all of you think that your church tradition is the end all and be all of everyone else's faith.
Oh, and one of the things that I admire so much about her is that her heart is also very much in her faith. She is a very kind and caring lady, who goes out of her way for others at every opportunity. She is everything a Christian ought to be, without being obnoxious about it. We could all, Catholic or not, learn from her.
Yes, I agree with Faith Alone about a few things, one of which is Catholic bullying. I will not submit to it, either. I know you don't like that, and I'm sorry. That's just the way it is.
Nothing against you personally...I just don't like bullies. I'm "speaking up"...

And...good morning. I do hope you have a pleasant day.

 

[Timothew]

My friend , I do understand. I just don't agree. It's been a pleasure speaking with you on this matter. You've been polite and engaging.

Thank you, can you stick around and continue the discussion, even though the thread has been moved to UDD? The Bible is true whether we discuss it in GT or UDD. CF's distinctions are irrelevant to God's Word.

 

[Angelquill]

Okay, here is your entire post with my entire post in the quote above. I made your "Yes." bold because it was the part of your post that directly answered my question, specifically I asked "Do you believe that?". Since you said "Yes." That was the relevant part of your reply, the rest was just verbiage to mitigate the "Yes." and to obfuscate the meaning of the "Yes.". If you really didn't mean "Yes." then you should not have said it. Perhaps you intended "Sort of, but only with these half dozen qualifications because basically I like annihilationism way more than I like what Jesus says in Matthew 25:46", but I suspect you would not like to say that, so you said "Yes." and then added half a dozen qualifications to make your Yes mean No. Anyway, I think my previous reply to your "Yes." was more favourable to your position. Your qualifications only make what you said in that "Yes." vacuous.

By the way, I am not attempting to be irenic, I gave up on that after you constantly called Catholics and Catholic teaching all sorts of unpleasant things. And after you spent four or five posts nodding to the absurd accusations made by "By Faith Alone" against the Catholic Church. It is evident that accurate presentation of Catholic beliefs is not part of the plan for By Faith Alone's posts and I think the same is true of your posts. I hope that can be corrected by yourself. There's nothing good about misrepresenting what I believe and what the Catholic Church teaches. Just as there's nothing good about eviscerating what Jesus says in Matthew 25:46.

Cheers.

You deliberately misrepresented what I said to make it sound like I was agreeing with your position that the wicked are subjected to eternal torment. My "vacuous qualifications" were there to tell you that I did not agree with you, and you know it.
You did it so you could demand a retraction which you know very well is not going to be forthcoming.
Who are you to demand anything of me, anyway? Once again, I do not recognize your authority over me, either.
You are just going to have to face the fact that those glory days are over.
Thank you, Mr. Martin Luther!!!!!!!!!

 

[Angelquill]

There is not enough money on earth to convince me that a good-hearted, loving person, like granny down the road, is going to suffer for eternity for simple unbelief.
The WICKED now is another story. Just what REALLY would warrant such a cook-out?

Case in point. Shacrach, Meschak and Abed-Nego. Ole Neb was CRUEL to sent those three Hebrew children for not worshiping him. I have ALWAYS thought it a half a bubble out of plumb to think God would do the same thing.

Yes...and it was one "like unto the Son of Man" who saved them from the flames...
Imagine that!!

 

[Timothew]

Yes...and it was one "like unto the Son of Man" who saved them from the flames...
Imagine that!!

It is! And the Son of Man saved those who trusted in God from being destroyed by the fire, but those who were against God were destroyed by the fire. I've heard this passage used to justify the belief in Eternal Conscious Torment, but the passage indicates the exact opposite of ECT.