Originally posted by karoly aczel=====================
Unfortunately Jaywill, I have to agree with Raj here.
Why dont you just say what you think. If someone asks for a scriptural quote then you could provide it.
Thats not to say you dont have a point...some things need to be expanded upon and I respect that.
I suspect you will get more readership if your posts were a bit shorter.
Its just us stupid humans , we are so impatient...especially in the age of the internet.
Unfortunately Jaywill, I have to agree with Raj here.
Why dont you just say what you think. If someone asks for a scriptural quote then you could provide it.
Thats not to say you dont have a point...some things need to be expanded upon and I respect that.
I suspect you will get more readership if your posts were a bit shorter.
Its just us stupid humans , we are so impatient...especially in the age of the internet.
===============================
Correct me if I err. But I recall that you wrote that you did not want to be saved.
If that is your decision, I am not writing anything here for your benefit. You don't want to be saved, PERIOD, according to you.
Okay, I'm clear. I have nothing more to explain to you. Right ?
Originally posted by karoly aczelAgain, you believing does not change reality, it only changes your
I disagree,our thinking is way more powerful than that. It could even save the world.
preceptions, your assumptions may alter your actions but they do
not always reflex reality, you may believe something to be true that
is not.
Kelly
Originally posted by karoly aczelUnfortunately !
Unfortunately Jaywill, I have to agree with Raj here.
Why dont you just say what you think. If someone asks for a scriptural quote then you could provide it.
Thats not to say you dont have a point...some things need to be expanded upon and I respect that.
I suspect you will get more readership if your posts were a bit shorter.
Its just us stupid humans , we are so impatient...especially in the age of the internet.
Sounds like you are apoligising that you agree with me ! ..😀
Interesting.
Originally posted by jaywillIf you intend to 'prove' that Christ did not mean 'annihilate' by saying 'destroy', then you win. I give up. I wont agree with any such proof though.
[b]==========================
Not for me, but for others who are trying to read your posts.
You will get more readership if you answer briefly and in simple language ... like Christ did. Try it.
================================
Thankyou, however the issue here is not the size of my readership.
If God wanted to make the Bible four chapter ...[text shortened]... without whining about their length (when there is something there I want to read).[/b]
Originally posted by Rajk999================================
If you intend to 'prove' that Christ did not mean 'annihilate' by saying 'destroy', then you win. I give up. I wont agree with any such proof though.
If you intend to 'prove' that Christ did not mean 'annihilate' by saying 'destroy', then you win. I give up. I wont agree with any such proof though.
===================================
First of all I would like to take this completely out of the realm of a personal contest. Today is a new day. Yes I got grumpy yesterday. For my part I apologize..
My parents were very liberal Presbyterians. You called them stupid yesterday. I forgive you for that. They gave me some children's Bible to read and the basics of the Gospel I got without them hounding me about anything.
Now, this matter should in the realm of people wanting to search for the truth. We are here searching for the truth. I believe it is in the Bible. So let's get this out of the realm of anyone having to back down on what they believe, or anybody "winning" just for the sake of "winning".
I will cut this post right here. I have more to write on the first and second death.
Originally posted by jaywillPerhaps what you call 'saved' and what I call 'enlightened' are the same thing. If they are then , yes, I do want to be saved. But as long as the word 'saved' has christian connotations, I will continue to avoid it.
[b]=====================
Unfortunately Jaywill, I have to agree with Raj here.
Why dont you just say what you think. If someone asks for a scriptural quote then you could provide it.
Thats not to say you dont have a point...some things need to be expanded upon and I respect that.
I suspect you will get more readership if your posts were a bit shor ...[text shortened]... PERIOD, according to you.
Okay, I'm clear. I have nothing more to explain to you. Right ?
Please dont misinterpret this as a sign that I think no-one should be 'saved' . If Jesus can save sinners from hell and give them eternal life in heaven ,I'm all for that.
A lot comes down to the interpretation of semantics and I feel that my role in this is to balance up theistical meanings. This means that I dont like to indulge in christian interpretations. Sorry.
note: The difference between being 'saved' and becoming 'enlightened' is that the latter is an effort on the part of the individual and not some external party. (please correct me if I have this wrong)
Originally posted by KellyJaySorry but that sort of thinking will have to be relegated to the historical scrapheap. Our thoughts are powerful but rather than me thinking that something is either true or not I rather like to focus on positive, practical improvements in the world. Even 'meditate' on them.
Again, you believing does not change reality, it only changes your
preceptions, your assumptions may alter your actions but they do
not always reflex reality, you may believe something to be true that
is not.
Kelly
You can continue until you are blue in the face with your out-dated beliefs or you can adjust them to coincide with our new emerging reality. Remember I did not say you were wrong , just that you will have to adjust.
Rajk999,
You can believe what you want to believe. I believe something I would really not prefer to believe, but I HAVE to believe it. That is eternal suffering of the Devil and his angels and the lost sinners whose names are not written in the book of life.
I may not like it. But I am committed to accepting what I see taught in the Bible.
Universalism's doctrine of annihilation into non-existence in the second death will not work.
The Bible will not allow you to make that mistake because it is clear:
"And the devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimestone, WHERE THE BEAST AND THE FALSE PROPHET WERE, and they will be TORMENTED .... DAY AND NIGHT .... FOREVER AND EVER." (My emphasis Rev. 20:10)
1.) Saying that Revelation is difficult therefore I don't have to take this passage at face value, will not work for me.
2.) The science of it is not important. The DREAD of it is communicated. Even if there is some symbolism to fire and brimestone, what ever it may symbolize it is definitely something to be AVOIDED.
3.) The beast and the false prophet were HUMANS. The Devil is a superhuman creature. They are there TOGETHER.
4.) The two humans were thrown in 1,000 years earlier. They are still there or ELSE it would not say "THEY [plural] will be tormented"
Now you can believe what you want Rajk999. I have to believe this.
5.) Non-existence is NOT a Torment.
6.) The lake of fire has a HURT to it. That is proved without question by Revelation 2:11 - "shall by no means be hurt of the second death"
7.) What is non-existent cannot be HURT. There is no pain in total annihilation into non-existence.
8.) The second death therefore CANNOT be non-existence. It is a destroying which HURTS. It is not a destroying which puts someone in a non-existent and painless non-being.
The Bible won't let you think that by the way the fate of the Devil and the false prophet and antichrist is discribed.
9.) The same word for the duration of their suffering is that used for the duration of God's reign, in English, well rendered as "forever and ever"
Compare Revelation 11:15 with Revelation 20:10.
Concerning the Matthew 10:28 passage:
Gehenna was a smoldering city dump outside of Jerusalem. It was used symbolically by Jesus to stand for the final destruction of the enemies of God.
The whole purpose of Jesus' warning was that God has an authority and power BEYOND that which man has. Man may kill the body. God can destroy both soul and body in "Gehenna".
If man can kill the soul or destroy the soul then there is no reason for Jesus to warn us that God can do something more to us than what man can do.
If killing the body renders the soul NON-EXISTENT then the warning is groundless. In that case after man kills the body there is nothing ELSE God can do to a person to harm him.
If killing the body makes the soul NON-EXISTENT, then for God to latter bring him back to life and kill soul and body in Gehenna is doing NOTHING that has not already been done by man, thus the warning would be baseless.
In that case man destroyed body and soul, and latter God raises from the dead and again destroys body and soul. What then is the difference?
Therefore Matthew 10:28 has to indicate that our fear of God's punishment should exceed our fear of man's harm to us.
There is no state of non-existence into which we may take refuge from eternal damnation. Refuge should be taken in JESUS CHRIST THE SAVIOR.
Originally posted by clearlightNot entirely. There is a kernel of truth there. It is certainly not the be all and end all as many on this site have made out, but what are you going to do?
Christianity is a load of drivel - the biggest lie in human history - any debate is a perfect waste of time.
Originally posted by clearlightI don't see it that way. All religions are kinda like a window to the human mind. They all seem to have certain similarities as well. Religions are not just about beliefs, but systems of beliefs. It is all very interesting to me.
Christianity is a load of drivel - the biggest lie in human history - any debate is a perfect waste of time.
Originally posted by jaywillYou said :
[b]================================
If you intend to 'prove' that Christ did not mean 'annihilate' by saying 'destroy', then you win. I give up. I wont agree with any such proof though.
===================================
First of all I would like to take this completely out of the realm of a personal contest. Today is a new day. Yes I ...[text shortened]... will cut this post right here. I have more to write on the first and second death.[/b]
I am thankful that I received a realistic teaching about eternal punishment as a young child.
All parents who scare their kids to good behavior are stupid parents. Some use the Bible others the police. Some use ficticious characters .. like Dracular or some animal. Those are stupid parents. You dont need to tell kids about eternal punishment to bring them up properly. Thats a nonsense argument.
As for truth, the teachings of Christ is the truth. If you have to twist and modify and re-interpret what Christ said, then thats your personal interpretation. Its not truth. I hope you can understand the difference.
Originally posted by jaywillLets do one point at a time: Rev 20:10 reference to eternal torment applies specifically to Devil, the Beast and the False Prophet.
.... "And the devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimestone, WHERE THE BEAST AND THE FALSE PROPHET WERE, and they will be TORMENTED .... DAY AND NIGHT .... FOREVER AND EVER." (My emphasis Rev. 20:10)
Why do you apply that eternal torment to all humanity whose names are not in the book of life. Or, tell me which groups of people it applies to.