The Truth About Hell [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : The Truth About Hell


Kingarthurhk
04-14-2012, 09:17
Everything you ever wanted to know about hell in one easy location:

http://www.helltruth.com/

It is not what you think it is.

GreenDrake
04-15-2012, 16:26
Brian Wilson - Your Imagination (Acapella) - YouTube

juggy4711
04-15-2012, 23:38
Truth about hell? Unless the link was that it does not exist it isn't the truth.

G23Gen4TX
04-15-2012, 23:49
This one is better:

http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/

Kingarthurhk
04-16-2012, 05:08
Hell has been misconstrued in Christianity, that somehow subscribes to the medieival concept of perpetual torture. This is not the case, and that is why I provided the link.

GreenDrake
04-16-2012, 05:27
There is no hell. Smoke and mirrors to scare the believers into submission. Brilliant marketing.

Animal Mother
04-16-2012, 06:08
There is no hell. Clearly, you've never been to Gallup, NM

Uzi4U
04-16-2012, 06:28
Hell is a very real place, and closer than you imagine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell,_Michigan:supergrin:

GreenDrake
04-16-2012, 07:08
Wait, I stand corrected, I have been to Hell. It was for cold weather training and an international CAX in Hell, Norway. Yes, we did have snowball fights there. Myth debunked. LOL

Dyerbill
04-16-2012, 07:25
There is no hell. Smoke and mirrors to scare the believers into submission. Brilliant marketing.

So your willing to go on record to call the writer of this..... Luke 16:19-31.....a liar?

Kingarthurhk
04-16-2012, 07:40
Clearly, you've never been to Gallup, NM

Santa Fe is worse than Gallup IMNSHO.

Kingarthurhk
04-16-2012, 07:47
The material presented is to take the terror out of what has been put into the mythology of hell popularized durring the medieval period based on pagan rather than biblical concepts.

It is more of a treatise about how God is not the cruel angry Zeus figure that throws all who have disagreed with him into eternal torment to be overseen by demons.

This gives the account of what hell is, destruction. Further, hell does not currently exist. There are not people being thrown into a lake of fire at this very moment when they pass.

1. This does not syncronize with the biblical account.

2. There is no justice in say, a misguided person who rejected God two centuries ago, being tormented longer than, say someone who is reponsible for the deaths of millions of people centuries later.

God is a just and loving God. Further, the destruction of the wicked is described as a "strange act" and He takes no pleasure in it.

That is the basis of the material presented. This is then placed within the context of scripture to verify this claim.

That is why I have presented this material. To demonstrate to those who have been taught the cruel and ancient pagan mythology that this is a misinterpratation of God's character.

Norske
04-16-2012, 07:50
The truth about Hell is that it probably does not exist, any more than Heaven really exists.

The two concepts are just more "good cop, bad cop", "carrot or stick", manipulation on the part of religions to obtaim the obedience of the dumb masses to the Bravo Sierra that religions spout.

Kingarthurhk
04-16-2012, 07:57
The truth about Hell is that it probably does not exist, any more than Heaven really exists.

As I just stated above, Hell does not currently exist. Heaven, however, does; and has long before the earth was created. Further, it is under construction:

John 14:1-4, "<sup>1</sup> “Do not let your hearts be troubled. You believe in God<sup class="footnote" value='[a (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#fen-NIV-26670a)]'>[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+14&version=NIV#fen-NIV-26670a)]</sup>; believe also in me. <sup id="en-NIV-26671" class="versenum">2</sup> My Father’s house has many rooms; if that were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you? <sup id="en-NIV-26672" class="versenum">3</sup> And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. <sup id="en-NIV-26673" class="versenum">4</sup> You know the way to the place where I am going.”

There is room for you Norske.

Woofie
04-16-2012, 08:30
So your willing to go on record to call the writer of this..... Luke 16:19-31.....a liar?

Do you call Stephen King a liar for writing works of fiction? How about Chaucer, Homer, or RL Stine?

Kingarthurhk
04-16-2012, 11:35
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1415455

Jeff82
04-16-2012, 12:40
So did Jesus exist or not?

Dyerbill
04-16-2012, 13:36
Do you call Stephen King a liar for writing works of fiction? How about Chaucer, Homer, or RL Stine?

So for you the Bible is fiction??? What do you believe tells the truth about God and any afterlife?


And if you do believe the Bible is fiction............who wrote it and why???

Norske
04-16-2012, 14:54
So did Jesus exist or not?

Or if he did actually exist, was he in fact a demigod or just a really, really bright Jewish Rabbi albeit with megalomania "who heard voices" and only thought he was God or the Son thereof?

:dunno:

Norske
04-16-2012, 14:57
So for you the Bible is fiction??? What do you believe tells the truth about God and any afterlife?


And if you do believe the Bible is fiction............who wrote it and why???

I do not doubt that much of the Bible relates actual historical incidents.

I doubt that those historical incidents have any basis in the actions or interventions of supernatural beings.

:upeyes:

Kingarthurhk
04-16-2012, 15:06
Or if he did actually exist, was he in fact a demigod or just a really, really bright Jewish Rabbi albeit with megalomania "who heard voices" and only thought he was God or the Son thereof?

:dunno:

Historically, Jesus can be shown to have lived when scripture says He lived.

This leaves you with three options:

1. He trully was the Son of God
2. He was a liar
3. He was a madman

Now the problem with the last two options, is if He were a liar, none of the apostles would have continued on preaching about Him, because He would have never risen from the dead and they would have dispersed and went on their own way. It is not like any of them earned any wealth or fame for their belief, in fact, pretty much all of them were put to death, except John who was exiled to Patmos.

If He were a madman, why would He be consistent with the scriptures of the "Old Testament" that has several prophecies predicting the manner in which He would come into the world, and the things He would do? Thousands of years before He was born into the world.

Further, why would He be shown to go around bringing sanity to the demon possessed? Surely, madmen don't bring sanity and healing and wisdom to others.

So, that really only leaves you with option number one.

Norske
04-16-2012, 15:22
Historically, Jesus can be shown to have lived when scripture says He lived.

This leaves you with three options:

1. He trully was the Son of God
2. He was a liar
3. He was a madman

Now the problem with the last two options, is if He were a liar, none of the apostles would have continued on preaching about Him, because He would have never risen from the dead and they would have dispersed and went on their own way. It is not like any of them earned any wealth or fame for their belief, in fact, pretty much all of them were put to death, except John who was exiled to Patmos.

If He were a madman, why would He be consistent with the scriptures of the "Old Testament" that has several prophecies predicting the manner in which He would come into the world, and the things He would do? Thousands of years before He was born into the world.

Further, why would He be shown to go around bringing sanity to the demon possessed? Surely, madmen don't bring sanity and healing and wisdom to others.

So, that really only leaves you with option number one.

I have pointed out, many times in this forum, pretty much the same 3 possibilities for anyone in the Bible who said "God Spoke Directly To Me".

Deluded, Lying, or God really did talk to him/her.

It is one of the main stumbling blocks to "Faith". To have "Faith" one must summarily dismiss any possibility of lies or delusion on the part of anyone making the claim.

In the OT, both Pharoah's priests and Moses did the "turn the staff into a snake" trick.

Which would tend to indicate that it was indeed a trick and not wood turning into a snake.

Of course, since Moses was raised in Pharoah's court as an Egyptian Prince, he would have been taught that trick by Pharoah's priests in the first place!

So why does he mention it as evidence of "Gods Presence" in his dealings with Pharaoh?

Secondly.

The Reverend Jim Jones was unquestionably insane.

Nonetheless, he was convincing enough that hundreds of his followers fed cyanide-laced Kool-Aid to their own children, then drink it themselves, convinced by Jones that this was "Gods Will".

Jim Jones shows us the (possibly evil) possibilities inherent in erroneous belief based on "faith".

There have to have been individuals throughout human history equally able to convince the dumb masses of their day and time as to their divinity or that they spoke "for God".

When in fact they were either deluded or lying. :dunno:

Animal Mother
04-16-2012, 15:30
Historically, Jesus can be shown to have lived when scripture says He lived.

This leaves you with three options:

1. He trully was the Son of God
2. He was a liar
3. He was a madman

Now the problem with the last two options, is if He were a liar, none of the apostles would have continued on preaching about Him, because He would have never risen from the dead and they would have dispersed and went on their own way. It is not like any of them earned any wealth or fame for their belief, in fact, pretty much all of them were put to death, except John who was exiled to Patmos.

If He were a madman, why would He be consistent with the scriptures of the "Old Testament" that has several prophecies predicting the manner in which He would come into the world, and the things He would do? Thousands of years before He was born into the world.

Further, why would He be shown to go around bringing sanity to the demon possessed? Surely, madmen don't bring sanity and healing and wisdom to others.

So, that really only leaves you with option number one. Lewis' trilemma doesn't take into account a number of scenarios, including the possibility that Jesus did live and was a teacher who claimed no divine nature but had that nature conferred upon him by his followers after his death. It's not as if we have any of Jesus' writings with which to evaluate his position directly. As for prophecies predicting Jesus in the Old Testament, all are dependent on accepting the NT as completely truthful and accurate, while there is no independent evidence that any such prophecies were actually fulfilled, much less in the person of Jesus.

Kingarthurhk
04-16-2012, 15:44
Lewis' trilemma doesn't take into account a number of scenarios, including the possibility that Jesus did live and was a teacher who claimed no divine nature but had that nature conferred upon him by his followers after his death. It's not as if we have any of Jesus' writings with which to evaluate his position directly. As for prophecies predicting Jesus in the Old Testament, all are dependent on accepting the NT as completely truthful and accurate, while there is no independent evidence that any such prophecies were actually fulfilled, much less in the person of Jesus.

This would seem to be a decent argument with the exception of the fact that Jesus is the most well known figure in the world today.

Had Jesus been marginalized like other historical figures I could see your point.

Had this been say Confucious, I could see your point.

The fact that an Atheist and Christian are discussing Jesus across the world at this very moment would seem to indicate that item number one is is the most logical choice.

As a side note, I am not familiar with Lewis.

Dyerbill
04-16-2012, 17:23
I do not doubt that much of the Bible relates actual historical incidents.

I doubt that those historical incidents have any basis in the actions or interventions of supernatural beings.

:upeyes:

Hmmm.....I am confused....if you believe some of the Bible to be true...............and the Bible is a lesson of God and mankind........where and how do you draw the line...truth or not???

Also you did not answer as what do YOU believe about God and afterlife:dunno:

G23Gen4TX
04-16-2012, 17:26
Historically, Jesus can be shown to have lived when scripture says He lived.

This leaves you with three options:

1. He trully was the Son of God
2. He was a liar
3. He was a madman

Now the problem with the last two options, is if He were a liar, none of the apostles would have continued on preaching about Him, because He would have never risen from the dead and they would have dispersed and went on their own way. It is not like any of them earned any wealth or fame for their belief, in fact, pretty much all of them were put to death, except John who was exiled to Patmos.

If He were a madman, why would He be consistent with the scriptures of the "Old Testament" that has several prophecies predicting the manner in which He would come into the world, and the things He would do? Thousands of years before He was born into the world.

Further, why would He be shown to go around bringing sanity to the demon possessed? Surely, madmen don't bring sanity and healing and wisdom to others.

So, that really only leaves you with option number one.

I pick #2 and #3 as the correct answer.

Lockback
04-16-2012, 17:29
My vision of Hell is a place where I have to listen to Obama speeches 24/7/365.
And there's no beer.

Woofie
04-16-2012, 18:47
So for you the Bible is fiction??? What do you believe tells the truth about God and any afterlife?


And if you do believe the Bible is fiction............who wrote it and why???

You assume there is a god and an afterlife. Further, you assume that if there is a god, it is the christian god. What if it is one of the multitudes of other gods humans have written about through the ages? What if there is some other god out there no man has ever even thought of?

As to who wrote it, it's pretty widely accepted that it was written by several different people atl different times.

Woofie
04-16-2012, 18:51
Historically, Jesus can be shown to have lived when scripture says He lived.


We've been over this before and no one has been able to produce an example from outside the Bible of an historically verified actor meeting a living, breathing Jesus.

And for the record, I do believe he was a real person, but there is just no evidence to prove definitively that he existed, whether as the messiah or just a regular joe.

G23Gen4TX
04-16-2012, 19:13
My vision of Hell is a place where I have to listen to Obama speeches coming out of the mouth of my mother in law 24/7/365.
And there's no beer.

Here, I fixed it for ya.

Norske
04-16-2012, 20:25
Fair Questions.

Hmmm.....I am confused....if you believe some of the Bible to be true...............

I believe the Bible is based on incidents that actually occurred. What I doubt is that supernatural beings were behind the incidents that occurred. They were observed to happen, and those who witnessed them attributed what they were seeing to supernatural beings.

For instance,

"God rains Fire and Brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah".

"Mt. Vesuvius Buries Pompeii".

"Enola Gay drops A-Bomb on Hiroshima".

S&G is clearly attributed to an act of God in the OT. What it might have been was Lot was quicker to recognize the symptoms of an impending volcanic eruption and got the heck out of S&G before it blew and buried his former neighbors.

At the time, the Romans "knew" that some "God", probably Hephasteus who they thought lived and worked in Vesuvius, probably blew up the mountain on a whim and buried all those Pompeiins.

Today, we know about plate tectonics and that mountains do blow up from time to time and all the time. Nothing "divine" about it.

The A-Bomb doing a similar job on Hiroshima is clearly not an "act of God". We know it to be an act of man.

History. NOT an "Act of God".

and the Bible is a lesson of God and mankind........

Each and every word in the Bible was first set down by pen, in ink, on parchment by a human being.

NO one disputes that fundamental fact.

Those men who wrote those words claim that they were "inspired" by God to write them. However, there are two other possibilities. That they lied about God inspiring their writings, or that they were insane and only thought that God was inspiring their writings.

"Faith" in the truth of the Bible starts by completely rejecting any possibility that any part of the Bible was the product of a liar, liars, or the insane.

Wheras I think that of the three possibilities, lies and insanity are in all cases likelier than the third possibility, divine inspiration.

where and how do you draw the line...truth or not???

Based on my observations of human nature, I believe the possibility that the Bible (and every other so-called "Holy Text" for that matter) is much more likely to be the product of lies or insanity than it is in fact the product of divine inspiration.

Also you did not answer as what do YOU believe about God and afterlife:dunno:

My views on this can be found in many other threads in this forum. You can find them in detail elsewhere so I will just try to hit the high points here.

I think mankind invented "Religion" 10-15,000 years ago at the time mankind stopped living as hunter-gatherers and began comparatively nomadic or sedentary agriculture-based societies.

"Religion" was invented to fill the purposes of what we now think of as "Government". Make law, interpret law, enforce law.

A device to enable an elite minority to exercise authority over a lesser, but much greater in number, majority.

"Religion" invented the concept of "God" as a unifying idea for their respective society to unify under.

It is the unification itself that is of prime importance to the society. The idea "God" under which the unification occurs, is not of much actual importance so long as the unification occurs.

To hear religious leaders tell it, "God", in theory, "provided" the authority exercised by the Religious/Governmental leaders who controlled the society.

But it is actually the other way around.

An Elite minority invents Religion. Religion invents Gods to justify the authority of the Elites over the masses. So long as the masses believe the lie that the Elites are entitled to the authority they claim to have been granted by the Gods, the Elites in fact enjoy that authority.

For instance, the practical effect of the 1st Four of the "10 Commandments" was to place and keep Moses and his family in authorityover the entire Hebrew Nation.

The words themselves do not count for much. The effect of the words is what was of importance to Moses. That is why he wrote them.

ArtificialGrape
04-16-2012, 21:06
This leaves you with three options:

1. He trully was the Son of God
2. He was a liar
3. He was a madman

Just as your affinity for Pascal's Wager, you are fond of presenting a subset of options and insisting that those are the only options.
Lewis' trilemma doesn't take into account a number of scenarios, including the possibility that Jesus did live and was a teacher who claimed no divine nature but had that nature conferred upon him by his followers after his death.

This leaves us with at least the following options:
Liar
Lunatic
Lord, or
Legend

-ArtificialGrape

Dyerbill
04-16-2012, 22:17
Just as your affinity for Pascal's Wager, you are fond of presenting a subset of options and insisting that those are the only options.


This leaves us with at least the following options:
Liar
Lunatic
Lord, or
Legend

-ArtificialGrape

Pardon my intervention into your part of this thread.........

It seems you chose to add folklore to the life and times of Jesus.....according to what? If you don't mind

juggy4711
04-16-2012, 22:49
Hmmm.....I am confused....if you believe some of the Bible to be true...............and the Bible is a lesson of God and mankind........where and how do you draw the line...truth or not???..

Easy. Those things that are possible without the need for divine influence could very well be true. The things that require divine influence are fiction.

Just as your affinity for Pascal's Wager, you are fond of presenting a subset of options and insisting that those are the only options.


This leaves us with at least the following options:
Liar
Lunatic
Lord, or
Legend

-ArtificialGrape

I think there is a 5th option that combines at least 3 of the above.

The Bible is pure gonzo journalism.

Dyerbill
04-16-2012, 22:57
Fair Questions.



I believe the Bible is based on incidents that actually occurred. What I doubt is that supernatural beings were behind the incidents that occurred. They were observed to happen, and those who witnessed them attributed what they were seeing to supernatural beings.

For instance,

"God rains Fire and Brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah".

"Mt. Vesuvius Buries Pompeii".

"Enola Gay drops A-Bomb on Hiroshima".

S&G is clearly attributed to an act of God in the OT. What it might have been was Lot was quicker to recognize the symptoms of an impending volcanic eruption and got the heck out of S&G before it blew and buried his former neighbors.

At the time, the Romans "knew" that some "God", probably Hephasteus who they thought lived and worked in Vesuvius, probably blew up the mountain on a whim and buried all those Pompeiins.

Today, we know about plate tectonics and that mountains do blow up from time to time and all the time. Nothing "divine" about it.

The A-Bomb doing a similar job on Hiroshima is clearly not an "act of God". We know it to be an act of man.

History. NOT an "Act of God".



Each and every word in the Bible was first set down by pen, in ink, on parchment by a human being.

NO one disputes that fundamental fact.

Those men who wrote those words claim that they were "inspired" by God to write them. However, there are two other possibilities. That they lied about God inspiring their writings, or that they were insane and only thought that God was inspiring their writings.

"Faith" in the truth of the Bible starts by completely rejecting any possibility that any part of the Bible was the product of a liar, liars, or the insane.

Wheras I think that of the three possibilities, lies and insanity are in all cases likelier than the third possibility, divine inspiration.



Based on my observations of human nature, I believe the possibility that the Bible (and every other so-called "Holy Text" for that matter) is much more likely to be the product of lies or insanity than it is in fact the product of divine inspiration.



My views on this can be found in many other threads in this forum. You can find them in detail elsewhere so I will just try to hit the high points here.

I think mankind invented "Religion" 10-15,000 years ago at the time mankind stopped living as hunter-gatherers and began comparatively nomadic or sedentary agriculture-based societies.

"Religion" was invented to fill the purposes of what we now think of as "Government". Make law, interpret law, enforce law.

A device to enable an elite minority to exercise authority over a lesser, but much greater in number, majority.

"Religion" invented the concept of "God" as a unifying idea for their respective society to unify under.

It is the unification itself that is of prime importance to the society. The idea "God" under which the unification occurs, is not of much actual importance so long as the unification occurs.

To hear religious leaders tell it, "God", in theory, "provided" the authority exercised by the Religious/Governmental leaders who controlled the society.

But it is actually the other way around.

An Elite minority invents Religion. Religion invents Gods to justify the authority of the Elites over the masses. So long as the masses believe the lie that the Elites are entitled to the authority they claim to have been granted by the Gods, the Elites in fact enjoy that authority.

For instance, the practical effect of the 1st Four of the "10 Commandments" was to place and keep Moses and his family in authorityover the entire Hebrew Nation.

The words themselves do not count for much. The effect of the words is what was of importance to Moses. That is why he wrote them.
t t
Sorry for the lack of computer skills to cut and paste and edit like most folks here........

#1 did Moses make up the first 4 commandments himself to control Israel...............if not who did? Why did Joshua and his family take over the Hebrews on Moses' death???

You say many people wrote the bible and they where incidents that actually occured........which ones?....the healing of the sick or raising the dead or the empty tomb.................

Where are the books that support your theory that God doesn't exist..............whom do you claim to speak for you and your afterlife...........I have my bible........you rely on?????

Animal Mother
04-16-2012, 23:17
Hmmm.....I am confused....if you believe some of the Bible to be true...............and the Bible is a lesson of God and mankind........where and how do you draw the line...truth or not???It's pretty simple, that which can be independently verified can be accepted as true. The fact that Sherman burned Atlanta doesn't make Gone With the Wind a true story, does it?

Jeff82
04-17-2012, 10:46
You missed my point. Jesus rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. This was witnessed by many. You can't explain that away.

Norske
04-17-2012, 10:59
You missed my point. Jesus rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. This was witnessed by many. You can't explain that away.

Then please explain why all these wholesale miracles that are related in the Bible

ARE NO LONGER HAPPENING TODAY!

If "God" performed miracles then, why did he/she/it stop doing so?

I think is boils down to the fact that literacy has been relatively uncommon until just the last couple of hundred years.

Abram, Literate. Moses, Literate. Living among masses and masses and masses of the illiterate!

If they recorded that "God Spoke to them personally", who was there to dispute it? Especially if all the other "witnesses" are all themselves illiterate?

Especially if, as Moses had, you have a couple of thousand Levite Sturmtruppen (his own family) hanging around to cut your throat at the first hint of "heresy"!?? :steamed:

Moses learned the fine points of absolute rule from the foremost practitioners of the art of ruthless religion/government of his day; Pharaoh and his Court.

He then applied those lessons to the then equivalent of today's "illegal immigrants" of his day; his own 2 million-strong second-class citizen Hebrew "nation" within Pharoah's "higher class" "superpower nation" of the time.

He could not be Pharoah, so he did the next best thing. He took his own kin out of Egypt on a successful re-invasion of their ancestral lands and ruled over them as "King" in all but name.

Goebbels probably learned about the "Big Lie" theory from Moses.

Stalin probably learned about "absolute despotism based on terror tactics" from Moses.

Paul7
04-19-2012, 21:21
Then please explain why all these wholesale miracles that are related in the Bible

ARE NO LONGER HAPPENING TODAY!

If "God" performed miracles then, why did he/she/it stop doing so?

Why would they, Jesus Christ was already validated as Messiah through them. Do you want them done in front of you personally? Would it make any difference if they were?

Paul7
04-19-2012, 21:27
Lewis' trilemma doesn't take into account a number of scenarios, including the possibility that Jesus did live and was a teacher who claimed no divine nature but had that nature conferred upon him by his followers after his death.

That leaves the nonsensical proposition that the Apostles made up the story and knowingly died for a lie. Would you do that? Wouldn't ONE person reveal this conspiracy you alledge, with no evidence I might add?

It's not as if we have any of Jesus' writings with which to evaluate his position directly. As for prophecies predicting Jesus in the Old Testament, all are dependent on accepting the NT as completely truthful and accurate, while there is no independent evidence that any such prophecies were actually fulfilled, much less in the person of Jesus.

Wrong, certainly His death in this list of 351 fulfilled prophecies was attested to by 'independent' sources, although I reject you disbelief in the Gospel accounts.
http://www.accordingtothescriptures.org/prophecy/353prophecies.html

What you are asking for is someone who saw the miracles yet didn't become a Christian, as that would somehow disqualify them for testimony. If you saw the miracles, wouldn't you become a Christian, and thus by your reasoning becoming a non-trustworthy witness? It's pure circular reasoning.

Guss
04-19-2012, 23:57
You missed my point. Jesus rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. This was witnessed by many. You can't explain that away.
It was SAID to have been witnessed by many. But how many accounts do we have?

Animal Mother
04-20-2012, 03:32
You missed my point. Jesus rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. This was witnessed by many. You can't explain that away.How many witnessed it? If there was such a multitude, how is it that no one who was there bothered to write about it? Where are the contrary accounts trying to explain away this amazing occurrence which was witnessed by so many who would now be at risk of falling under the sway of a charlatan? How could this pivotal event be less documented than Odin's quest for knowledge?

Animal Mother
04-20-2012, 04:01
That leaves the nonsensical proposition that the Apostles made up the story and knowingly died for a lie. No, it doesn't, they may very well have truly believed. People truly believe that poker is a sport, that doesn't make it true.
Would you do that? No, but I also wouldn't castrate myself, move into the middle of the jungle, live in a cave, scourge myself, or any one of the myriad other nutty things people do in pursuit of their faith.
Wouldn't ONE person reveal this conspiracy you alledge, with no evidence I might add?There were any number of accounts differing from and directly opposing the canonical story. Luckily some of them have survived the efforts to erase them so that we know of the turmoil that existed.
Wrong, Me wrong? That's unpossible.
certainly His death in this list of 351 fulfilled prophecies was attested to by 'independent' sources, And yet neither you, nor the page you've linked lists any of these independent sources. Odd that.
although I reject you disbelief in the Gospel accounts. I'm sure you do, but you don't do it based on any evidence.
What you are asking for is someone who saw the miracles yet didn't become a Christian, as that would somehow disqualify them for testimony. You always raise this strawman, perhaps because you have no stronger argument. I'll happily accept accounts from Christians who were present at the events. Got any? No? Disappointing.
If you saw the miracles, wouldn't you become a Christian, I can't say without actually witnessing them.
and thus by your reasoning becoming a non-trustworthy witness? It's pure circular reasoning. Perhaps we should stick to the arguments I actually make, not the ones you try to assign to me. Though if we're going to discuss circular reasoning, we should probably start with the supposed prophecies found in the Bible. You've listed 351 (which is impressive), why don't you pick the one you feel has the firmest foundation in terms of external evidence and we'll discuss it in depth.

Guss
04-20-2012, 14:39
So if there is no Hell, how does God maintain discipline in Heaven? Without the threat of Hell, how does he prevent rebellion?

Kingarthurhk
04-20-2012, 15:08
So if there is no Hell, how does God maintain discipline in Heaven? Without the threat of Hell, how does he prevent rebellion?

It already happened. The decision was already made between those loyal to God and those loyal to Lucifer. Now, the same decision is for each of us here to make.

Revelation 12:7-9, "<sup>7</sup> Then war broke out in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. <sup id="en-NIV-30900" class="versenum">8</sup> But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. <sup id="en-NIV-30901" class="versenum">9</sup> The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him."

Guss
04-20-2012, 15:57
It already happened. The decision was already made between those loyal to God and those loyal to Lucifer. Now, the same decision is for each of us here to make.

Revelation 12:7-9, "<sup>7</sup> Then war broke out in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. <sup id="en-NIV-30900" class="versenum">8</sup> But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. <sup id="en-NIV-30901" class="versenum">9</sup> The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him."
But he wasn't killed or snuffed out.

Vic Hays
04-20-2012, 16:12
But he wasn't killed or snuffed out.

God is fair and just. If He snuffed out satan right away there would always be that little bit of doubt that satan might be right.

The world is operating according to satans principles of selfishness and force to show the results of satans principles.
Those who have chosen to follow God have the benefit of being forgiven because God took the penalty of our sins upon Himself.

We can choose his principles of Truth, Mercy, fairness, and individual liberty in this world and by the blood of Jesus be cleansed from our former sins and principles.

Soon Jesus will come again and all of sin and sinners will be burned in the fire including satan.

Matthew 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather you together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

13:39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.

13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
13:43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who has ears to hear, let him hear.

Guss
04-20-2012, 16:42
God is fair and just. If He snuffed out satan right away there would always be that little bit of doubt that satan might be right.

....
So once the world is no more, how will God punish rebellious human souls or angels?

Vic Hays
04-20-2012, 18:28
So once the world is no more, how will God punish rebellious human souls or angels?

That is the whole idea. Sin has been allowed to run its course. There will be no one who wishes to repeat it. BTW the earth will be remade for man to dwell in.

Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall be dissolved with fervent heat, and the earth and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
3:11 Seeing that these things are thus all to be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in [all] holy living and godliness,
3:12 looking for and earnestly desiring the coming of the day of God, by reason of which the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
3:13 But, according to his promise, we look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

lomfs24
04-20-2012, 20:47
So if there is no Hell, how does God maintain discipline in Heaven? Without the threat of Hell, how does he prevent rebellion?

The same way three little pigs, with no opposing thumbs, built three houses.

Really, when you think about it heaven and hell are run by two opposing authorities. But heaven uses hell as a place of punishment. Now, that means God and Satan are in cahoots together in this whole reward/punishment scheme. And Satan is not really God's archenemy.

Or else, if God and Satan really are archenemies, what prevents Satan from piling on the sulfer and burning out the flues or neglecting the fires and letting them go smack out?

The entire idea of heaven and hell is just ridiculous.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Tilley
04-20-2012, 21:35
You missed my point. Jesus rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. This was witnessed by many. You can't explain that away.
They expect 21st Century documentation from 1st Century events.

Someones eyewitness account is not good enough. The Roman's and the Jews had so much to lose by not disproving Jesus, and yet history is silent.


The Christians weren't.


Organic life came from an inorganic planet. Science does not know how. If science can't prove how life came about on this planet, does that mean we don't really exist?

God in all His totality exists, yet science has no proof of his existence. But this time it really means He doesn't exist...

Selective reasoning?

Guss
04-21-2012, 04:28
That is the whole idea. Sin has been allowed to run its course. There will be no one who wishes to repeat it. BTW the earth will be remade for man to dwell in.

...
Would that mean that free will ceased to exist?

Kingarthurhk
04-21-2012, 13:09
The same way three little pigs, with no opposing thumbs, built three houses.

Really, when you think about it heaven and hell are run by two opposing authorities. But heaven uses hell as a place of punishment. Now, that means God and Satan are in cahoots together in this whole reward/punishment scheme. And Satan is not really God's archenemy.

Or else, if God and Satan really are archenemies, what prevents Satan from piling on the sulfer and burning out the flues or neglecting the fires and letting them go smack out?

The entire idea of heaven and hell is just ridiculous.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


Your description is ridiculous, as it underscores the pagan concept, and not the biblical one. If you looked at the link I provided on the OP, you would not come to these conclusions.

lomfs24
04-21-2012, 14:03
Your description is ridiculous, as it underscores the pagan concept, and not the biblical one. If you looked at the link I provided on the OP, you would not come to these conclusions.

Yes, King, it is ridiculous, the whole idea is. But just to be fair I will go look at the link and if there is anything there worth mentioning I will be sure to do it.

lomfs24
04-21-2012, 14:15
Alright, King, I want to be perfectly clear about this up front. I think Heaven and Hell are a bunch of hogwash. Whew! Got that out of the way. But I am willing to discuss this website.

Let's first start with Lazarus and the Rich Man. First off, I was impressed to see that the creator of this site immediately identified this as a parable. Which it is. However, one thing that we do know about Jesus' teaching is that he used parables that the people were familiar with. Farmers, local birds and animals etc... So, since we know how Jesus taught wouldn't it suggest that, at least, the concept of a fiery hell was something that they were familiar with and could relate to?

Vic Hays
04-21-2012, 17:01
. So, since we know how Jesus taught wouldn't it suggest that, at least, the concept of a fiery hell was something that they were familiar with and could relate to?

Greek philosophy and mythology was known to the Jews of Jesus time so yes, they were familiar with the concept of a fiery hell.

The Bible does not teach that this is fact, however. The Bible teaches the final destruction of the wicked by fire.

Malachi 4:1 For, behold, the day comes, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yes, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that comes shall burn them up, said the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.
4:2 But to you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and you shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.
4:3 And you shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, said the LORD of hosts.

Jesus taught the destruction of the wicked also. Men are able to destroy the body, but God is able to utterly destroy a man to a state from which there is no resurrection.

Matthew 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Guss
04-21-2012, 21:28
Alright, King, I want to be perfectly clear about this up front. I think Heaven and Hell are a bunch of hogwash. Whew! Got that out of the way. But I am willing to discuss this website.

Let's first start with Lazarus and the Rich Man. First off, I was impressed to see that the creator of this site immediately identified this as a parable. Which it is. However, one thing that we do know about Jesus' teaching is that he used parables that the people were familiar with. Farmers, local birds and animals etc... So, since we know how Jesus taught wouldn't it suggest that, at least, the concept of a fiery hell was something that they were familiar with and could relate to?
And why would he use a parable that would cause people to think that Hell was something that it wasn't? A parable is one thing, but misleading people is another.

lomfs24
04-21-2012, 22:48
And why would he use a parable that would cause people to think that Hell was something that it wasn't? A parable is one thing, but misleading people is another.

Why would the author that wrote about Jesus deceive his audience? That is a whole different topic and should probably be addressed in a different thread.

lomfs24
04-21-2012, 22:59
Greek philosophy and mythology was known to the Jews of Jesus time so yes, they were familiar with the concept of a fiery hell.

The Bible does not teach that this is fact, however. The Bible teaches the final destruction of the wicked by fire.

Malachi 4:1 For, behold, the day comes, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yes, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that comes shall burn them up, said the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.
4:2 But to you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and you shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.
4:3 And you shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, said the LORD of hosts.

Jesus taught the destruction of the wicked also. Men are able to destroy the body, but God is able to utterly destroy a man to a state from which there is no resurrection.

Matthew 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Vic, I know you don't want to hear this but what you believe and what the JW's teach is really not far off. And, as you know, I was once a JW.

But just to be clear, do you believe there is a fiery eternal torment for people in hell? ie... forever. Or is the fire short lived and represents the eternal destruction of a human or a soul? Something you don't come back from like a fire?

Secondly, I will be the first to say that I am not intimately familiar with Greek mythology. Which stories in Greek mythology talk about an eternal fiery torment? Or a fiery torment at all? I am not doubting you, I just am not familiar with those Greek myths and would like to look at them.

Being raised a JW, I pretty much didn't read anything that they org didn't provide for me.

Vic Hays
04-21-2012, 23:39
Vic, I know you don't want to hear this but what you believe and what the JW's teach is really not far off. And, as you know, I was once a JW.

But just to be clear, do you believe there is a fiery eternal torment for people in hell? ie... forever. Or is the fire short lived and represents the eternal destruction of a human or a soul? Something you don't come back from like a fire?

Secondly, I will be the first to say that I am not intimately familiar with Greek mythology. Which stories in Greek mythology talk about an eternal fiery torment? Or a fiery torment at all? I am not doubting you, I just am not familiar with those Greek myths and would like to look at them.

Being raised a JW, I pretty much didn't read anything that they org didn't provide for me.

The Bible declares a destruction by fire. Because of translation the words forever and ever are used, but texts like Malachi 4 are very straightforward and understandable.

The Bible says that there is a judgment before the second coming while some people are still alive.

The mixture of Greek mythology and Bible is obvious when compared with popular conceptions of hell. The fire from Bible texts and concepts of immortal souls and the underworld of the dead from Greek mythology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hades

"In older Greek myths, the realm of Hades is the misty and gloomy[19] abode of the dead (also called Erebus), where all mortals go. Later Greek philosophy introduced the idea that all mortals are judged after death and are either rewarded or cursed. Very few mortals could leave his realm once they entered: the exceptions, Heracles, Theseus, are heroic. Even Odysseus in his Nekyia (Odyssey, xi) calls up the spirits of the departed, rather than descend to them."

Kingarthurhk
04-21-2012, 23:40
Vic, I know you don't want to hear this but what you believe and what the JW's teach is really not far off. And, as you know, I was once a JW.

But just to be clear, do you believe there is a fiery eternal torment for people in hell? ie... forever. Or is the fire short lived and represents the eternal destruction of a human or a soul? Something you don't come back from like a fire?

There is not a perpetual firey torment for people. It is eternal destruction. Hell does not even exist right now. People who are laying in their graves, are awaiting the resurection of eternal life, or eternal destruction, or the "second death".


Secondly, I will be the first to say that I am not intimately familiar with Greek mythology. Which stories in Greek mythology talk about an eternal fiery torment? Or a fiery torment at all? I am not doubting you, I just am not familiar with those Greek myths and would like to look at them.

The concept of an eternal place of torment was advanced a great deal by the Medieval Church as a means of controlling the people through fear, and misrepresenting the character of God as vengeful and sadistic.

Eternal destruction is about never allowing the possibility of another rebellion in heaven, or anywhere else in all of creation. That way sin and suffering must end and never rise again.

Being raised a JW, I pretty much didn't read anything that they org didn't provide for me.[/QUOTE]

Guss
04-22-2012, 00:01
Why would the author that wrote about Jesus deceive his audience? That is a whole different topic and should probably be addressed in a different thread.
My comments were entirely relevant if you take the time to read back. But this is a forum where I am accustomed to people not taking in the entirety.

TangoFoxtrot
04-22-2012, 07:52
Everything you ever wanted to know about hell in one easy location:

http://www.helltruth.com/

It is not what you think it is.


Earth is hell and a test of man's endurance!

lomfs24
04-22-2012, 11:10
Eternal destruction is about never allowing the possibility of another rebellion in heaven, or anywhere else in all of creation. That way sin and suffering must end and never rise again.
I would agree with that. And it's the idea that was presented in the website. I think it's an accurate description as presented in the Bible. I think it's the idea that the writers trying to get across.

As I said before, though, I think this is on the same plane as arguing whether or not the author wanted us to believe that the third pig used red bricks or grey bricks.

Kingarthurhk
04-22-2012, 11:29
I would agree with that. And it's the idea that was presented in the website. I think it's an accurate description as presented in the Bible. I think it's the idea that the writers trying to get across.

As I said before, though, I think this is on the same plane as arguing whether or not the author wanted us to believe that the third pig used red bricks or grey bricks.

I find it relevant, because it takes a constantly distorted image of God, and puts it right. I think a lot of people have been turned off by God because of this recurring image, that is not biblical, of such treatises such "Sinners in the Hand of an Angry God" which couldn't be further from the truth.

God is about love, and doesn't rejoice in destroying the wicked. He sent the Son, Jesus Christ, not to condemn the world, but to be a means of salvation.

Once, we put aside this twisted myth that God wants to torture people forever and ever, a point of view that I would argue is blasphemous as it completely misrepresents the character of God, people will be more receptive to wanting to seek Him out.

lomfs24
04-22-2012, 11:36
I find it relevant, because it takes a constantly distorted image of God, and puts it right. I think a lot of people have been turned off by God because of this recurring image, that is not biblical, of such treatises such "Sinners in the Hand of an Angry God" which couldn't be further from the truth.

God is about love, and doesn't rejoice in destroying the wicked. He sent the Son, Jesus Christ, not to condemn the world, but to be a means of salvation.

Once, we put aside this twisted myth that God wants to torture people forever and ever, a point of view that I would argue is blasphemous as it completely misrepresents the character of God, people will be more receptive to wanting to seek Him out.

This is not what put me off God. But I would agree that there are many people who have been put off by the concept of Hell. But if you were to look at the rest of the Bible and completely discard the notion of hell all together you would still see a vengeful God. Ordering or committing homicide, genocide, infanticide plagues, scourges, snake bites etc... The list goes on. Some of these things he did to his enemies, some he did to his own people. "You better follow me or else" is a common theme in the Bible. That's why the concept of hell was so easily introduced. It followed right into God's other deeds and actions.

muscogee
04-22-2012, 12:57
So your willing to go on record to call the writer of this..... Luke 16:19-31.....a liar?

Mistaken, at best.

muscogee
04-22-2012, 12:58
So did Jesus exist or not?

There are thousands of them in South Texas.

Kingarthurhk
04-22-2012, 13:04
There are thousands of them in South Texas.

Just like Jesus' name was Yashua, or Joshua, which was pretty much the equivalent of calling someone "Joe". The hispanic community has basically made the name Jesus, as common as "Jose" from their cultural perspective.

But, then again, a very common name in the United States, is Michael, or "Mike" which is basically the same thing,

lomfs24
04-22-2012, 14:21
So your willing to go on record to call the writer of this..... Luke 16:19-31.....a liar?

Dyerbill, I wouldn't call him a liar anymore than I would call anyone a liar who presents a fictitious story. It was a fiction story from the word go. You do realize that Luke 16:19-31 is a parable, a story, an illustration, not something to be taken as real but rather an story to get an idea across?

Kingarthurhk
04-22-2012, 16:00
As I said before, though, I think this is on the same plane as arguing whether or not the author wanted us to believe that the third pig used red bricks or grey bricks.

I find the Three Little Pigs entertaining. I watch them on the History Channel.:supergrin:

http://strangeherring.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/pawn-stars-16bacd51de80a05e.jpg

lomfs24
04-22-2012, 21:00
I am more of a Hardcore Pawn kinda guy. http://i2.listal.com/image/1746789/600full-hardcore-pawn-photo.jpg

Dyerbill
04-23-2012, 06:31
Dyerbill, I wouldn't call him a liar anymore than I would call anyone a liar who presents a fictitious story. It was a fiction story from the word go. You do realize that Luke 16:19-31 is a parable, a story, an illustration, not something to be taken as real but rather an story to get an idea across?

Did you read the text?....................it talks about one man in hell who ask for comfort and water...he gets neither...........he then ask for someone return from the dead to warn his brothers of this terrible place..........the writer says even they have Moses and the prophets....the word....and they would not believe even if one returns from the dead......

So please explain this parable to me.

What idea was the writer trying to get across??????

lomfs24
04-23-2012, 07:16
Did you read the text?....................it talks about one man in hell who ask for comfort and water...he gets neither...........he then ask for someone return from the dead to warn his brothers of this terrible place..........the writer says even they have Moses and the prophets....the word....and they would not believe even if one returns from the dead......

So please explain this parable to me.

What idea was the writer trying to get across??????

I am not going to do a line by line analysis of the parable here. But if you are interested you can search Google for The Rich Man and Lazarus Meaning (https://www.google.com/search?aq=2&oq=rich+man+and+la&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=rich+man+and+lazarus+meaning). That should keep you busy for a few hours reading.

Norske
04-23-2012, 07:18
Why would they, Jesus Christ was already validated as Messiah through them.

Validated.....according to THEM. What if they simply lied?

Why did hundreds of people feed cyanide kool-aid to their children then drink it themselves on the word of Jim Jones that that what God wanted them to do?

They had FAITH. Faith in "the Word of God" according to Jim Jones!

Insanity is not hard to believe at any time or place.

Beyond that, I believe that new religions and new schisms within older religions arise to supplant older, established religions or older schisms as the case may be.

THAT in fact was why Jesus was Crucified !

The Pharisees were convinced his rising number of followers were going to supplant the little remaining religious authority they had left under Roman secular control.

They conned the Romans into believing Jesus was a threat to Roman Secular Authority as well.

And up on the cross he went! :upeyes:

And the Pharisees were RIGHT.

How many Christians are there in the world today?

Billions!

How many Hebrews?

About 12-15 Million!

If you are trying to get a new schism or religion off the ground, 'the ends justifies the means".

"Our founder was the Son of God".

LIE about it.

Do you want them done in front of you personally?

It would help.

But then, modern magicians can make elephants, even the Statue of Liberty appear to disappear. :faint:

Just what is "an act of God"?

What is just a slight of hand trick to fool the yokels? :dunno:

Would it make any difference if they were?

Bren
04-23-2012, 07:23
Do you call Stephen King a liar for writing works of fiction? How about Chaucer, Homer, or RL Stine?

I don't call them liars because they write fiction that they intend to be taken as fiction, not truth. Luke (actually, the anonymous author of the gospel of Luke) wrote fiction that is used to deceive people and help to control them, so he is probably a liar. On the other hand, if he believed what he wrote, he isn't necessarily a liar, but like flying saucer abductees, that doesn't make his story true.

Norske
04-23-2012, 07:28
One day we may all die by fire!

We could get beyotch-smacked by another dinosaur killer-type asteroid.

The Yellowstone supervolcano may decide to pop.

Or, heck, nuke ourselves with the same effect!

Resetting the blue screen for the entire Human Race at one go!

And then the surviving Meerkats will evolve to fill the the ecological niches formerly held by the extinct human race.

I wonder what the Meerkat religion(s) will look like?

"Does God have a tail?"

"Yes. But he does not need a Starship!"

Bren
04-23-2012, 07:30
Someones eyewitness account is not good enough. The Roman's and the Jews had so much to lose by not disproving Jesus, and yet history is silent.


No, they didn't. That's like arguing I should be trying to prove that William Smith from Arkansas (who I've never heard of) is a fraud, because in 100 years people will start to think he was the second coming of Jesus.

muscogee
04-23-2012, 08:46
Did you read the text?....................it talks about one man in hell who ask for comfort and water...he gets neither...........he then ask for someone return from the dead to warn his brothers of this terrible place..........the writer says even they have Moses and the prophets....the word....and they would not believe even if one returns from the dead......

So please explain this parable to me.

What idea was the writer trying to get across??????

Rich people go to Hell. Poor people go to Heaven.

Vic Hays
04-23-2012, 08:57
Rich people go to Hell. Poor people go to Heaven.

Muscogee

You got it!!! You can understand the Bible

Now look at the spiritual meaning of that. Jesus must be your greatest possession if you want to be in His kingdom with Him.

Matthew 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.
19:22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

And the inverse:

Matthew 13:45 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls:
13:46 Who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it.

By extension:

Luke 9:24 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it.

muscogee
04-23-2012, 09:36
Muscogee

You got it!!! You can understand the Bible

Now look at the spiritual meaning of that. Jesus must be your greatest possession if you want to be in His kingdom with Him.

Matthew 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.
19:22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

And the inverse:

Matthew 13:45 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls:
13:46 Who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it.

By extension:

Luke 9:24 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it.

I agree. I guess there will be a lot of camels going through the eyes of needles in Heaven.

lomfs24
04-23-2012, 09:41
Muscogee

You got it!!! You can understand the Bible

Now look at the spiritual meaning of that. Jesus must be your greatest possession if you want to be in His kingdom with Him.

Matthew 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.
19:22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

And the inverse:

Matthew 13:45 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls:
13:46 Who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it.

By extension:

Luke 9:24 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it.

Just a question. What in the Rich Man's life would cause him to be cast into hell? I don't see anything about his life that would cause him to cast into hell. Surely it wasn't simply because he was wealthy. Job was wealthy and was considered a friend of God. And nothing in the Bible says you can't be wealthy. Just that it's easier to not be wealthy and the greed and love of money is a problem, but not the money itself.

Vic Hays
04-23-2012, 12:51
Just a question. What in the Rich Man's life would cause him to be cast into hell? I don't see anything about his life that would cause him to cast into hell. Surely it wasn't simply because he was wealthy. Job was wealthy and was considered a friend of God. And nothing in the Bible says you can't be wealthy. Just that it's easier to not be wealthy and the greed and love of money is a problem, but not the money itself.

You are correct. Spiritual wealth is what is necessary to gain the kingdom of heaven. If literal wealth would keep you out of heaven then Nicodemus, Job, Abraham, Zacchaeus etc would be excluded.

What did the rich man do to exclude him from heaven? They (the Jews by and large and specifically those Jesus was talking to) considered themselves spiritually rich (chosen of God) and ignored the beggar outside the door ( the Gentiles whom they were supposed to be witnesses to).

You can see where the parable was aimed by Jesus comment:

Luke 16:14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.
16:15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.

lomfs24
04-23-2012, 13:51
What did the rich man do to exclude him from heaven? They (the Jews by and large and specifically those Jesus was talking to) considered themselves spiritually rich (chosen of God) and ignored the beggar outside the door ( the Gentiles whom they were supposed to be witnesses to).

Fair enough.

muscogee
04-23-2012, 15:08
Just a question. What in the Rich Man's life would cause him to be cast into hell? I don't see anything about his life that would cause him to cast into hell. Surely it wasn't simply because he was wealthy.

Since nothing about the rich man is mentioned other then him being rich, it seems to me that was the reason. Jesus harps on wealth all through the New Testament. The Lord's Prayer says, "Give us this day our daily bread". As far as the material world is concerned, that's it. You can't ask for a house, a car, a 401K, health care, retirement, or anything else. All you get is your daily bread. You don't even get tomorrows bread until tomorrow. Of course, this is totally unrealistic unless you expect the world to end at any moment, which they all did.

Vic Hays
04-23-2012, 17:02
Since nothing about the rich man is mentioned other then him being rich, it seems to me that was the reason. Jesus harps on wealth all through the New Testament. The Lord's Prayer says, "Give us this day our daily bread". As far as the material world is concerned, that's it. You can't ask for a house, a car, a 401K, health care, retirement, or anything else. All you get is your daily bread. You don't even get tomorrows bread until tomorrow. Of course, this is totally unrealistic unless you expect the world to end at any moment, which they all did.

Since nothing about the rich man is mentioned other than his being blessed in many ways it would seem logical that this parable was meant to teach those listening to Jesus at the time. These were Jews and many of them were covetous. The punch line points up that it was these Jews that Jesus was speaking to. They had Moses and the prophets. They would not accept Him even if He rose from the dead. Lazarus was the name of one He resurrected and instead of accepting this miracle it made them blind with rage to kill Jesus.

Luke 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

And after the resurrection of Lazarus:

John 11:53 Then from that day forth they took counsel together for to put him to death.

lomfs24
04-23-2012, 21:04
Since nothing about the rich man is mentioned other then him being rich, it seems to me that was the reason.

That's too bad really. The Rich guy probably spent most of his life praising God for blessing him so much then BAM! Right straight to hell.

GreenDrake
04-24-2012, 07:43
Rich go to hell? Hmmm, guess all those athletes who win and praise jeebus better reconsider their selfless speeches. I'd like to see the losers interviewed and blame the devil because god certainly wouldn't want them to lose.

muscogee
04-24-2012, 12:02
That's too bad really. The Rich guy probably spent most of his life praising God for blessing him so much then BAM! Right straight to hell.

As I said, the New Testament is unrealistic at so many levels.

muscogee
04-24-2012, 12:05
Rich go to hell? Hmmm, guess all those athletes who win and praise jeebus better reconsider their selfless speeches. I'd like to see the losers interviewed and blame the devil because god certainly wouldn't want them to lose.

What about Billy Graham, John Hagee, Robert Schuller, Oral Roberts, and on and on?

Vic Hays
04-24-2012, 16:05
What about Billy Graham, John Hagee, Robert Schuller, Oral Roberts, and on and on?

Everything belongs to God. Men may consider those men to be rich, but God sees the heart. Working as a gospel worker does not give one an automatic pass with God especially if they are actually working against God as a false apostle.

Matthew 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
7:22 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?
7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

user
04-30-2012, 19:32
"Hell" is merely a synonym for "death" or "the grave". "Gehenna" is the dump outside the wall of Jerusalem where, like dumps used to be most everywhere, before we all got ecological, there was always stuff burning. Useful terms for metaphorical explanations, but not scientifically descriptive.

I've come to understand that the Presence of God IS "the fire". Being in the presence of God is a bit like getting cuddly with the core of a nuclear reactor, except at much greater pressure. That's why we have this cozy little space/time construct of limited dimensionality to grow up and develop in. ("For he is like a refiner's fire.")

However, most of the references to the fate of humans who do not survive the transition of death talk in terms of combustible materials: trees, straw, grass, weeds. So those who do not expose themselves to the fire for further refinement every day will not survive what Jesus calls, "the second death." I call it the "law of conservation of spirit": that which lacks sufficient power and cohesion to hang together in the presence of The Power will simply lose its organizational principle and be dispersed like a drop of salt water into a bucket of fresh.

"No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. Each tree is recognized by its own fruit. People do not pick figs from thornbushes, nor grapes from briers. The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For out of the overflow of his heart his mouth speaks." -- Jesus Lk. 7:43.

"The axe is already at the foot of the tree, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire." -- John the Baptist, Lk. 3:9.

Also, "If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire, and burned." -- Jesus Jn. 15:6.

Combustible materials are completely consumed - obliterated. There is no torture, anymore than acorns that fail to sprout or that get eaten by deer or squirrels, are tortured. Most acorns do not become oak trees, nor do most humans survive the transition.

Firebob2917
04-30-2012, 20:23
When Jesus talk by parables he never mention names, the story of the prodigal son, the bridesmaid with there lamps, etc. The story of Lazarus is one that he used by name. Why?

lomfs24
04-30-2012, 20:38
Because it was people they could identify with.

Vic Hays
04-30-2012, 21:38
When Jesus talk by parables he never mention names, the story of the prodigal son, the bridesmaid with there lamps, etc. The story of Lazarus is one that he used by name. Why?

Lazarus was the name of one of the people that Jesus raised as an undeniable miracle. Lazarus had been dead for four days and was beginning to decompose. If Lazarus had been in heaven Jesus would have had to say "come down". Lazarus was in the grave so Jesus said "come forth".

Instead of this miracle making the Jews believe in Jesus it made them determined to kill Him.

This story of the resurrection of Lazarus fits well in the parable.

Tilley
04-30-2012, 22:40
Lazarus was the name of one of the people that Jesus raised as an undeniable miracle. Lazarus had been dead for four days and was beginning to decompose. If Lazarus had been in heaven Jesus would have had to say "come down". Lazarus was in the grave so Jesus said "come forth".

Instead of this miracle making the Jews believe in Jesus it made them determined to kill Him.

This story of the resurrection of Lazarus fits well in the parable.

Vic, I think he meant the true story of Lazarus and the hRich Man...

user
05-01-2012, 06:06
Assume for the moment that all of the NT is entirely fictitious. Is it any less true? If what Jesus said depended on his physical, scientifically verifiable existence for its validity, would that be a problem for you? The function of mythopoeic language is not science, or even history; it's like art - it is designed to communicate a truth in a context in which the factual veracity is irrelevant.

The Bible is a guidebook, not a cookbook. None of the contributors were post-Enlightenment scientific thinkers, and the idea of history as a discipline had only just been invented.

My favorite example of "lying" is this: John omits any reference to how Jesus got into Jerusalem; Mark and Luke have him riding in on a donkey; Matthew has him coming in not just on the donkey, but on the donkey's colt as well. So, who's "lying"? Clearly Matthew's story is pretty bogus from a factual point of view. So why'd he write it that way? Take a look at Zechariah 9:9; Matthew's point is, "See here!!! This is the guy!!!". He took pains to match up the events in Jesus' life with those of OT prophecy. (He also took pains to match those events up with Mithraism and the Cult of Rome, but that's another story.)

Point is, it's not "lying", because the factual veracity doesn't matter. What matters is the truth of the story. Matthew was right, Jesus was the guy.

lomfs24
05-01-2012, 10:58
Point is, it's not "lying", because the factual veracity doesn't matter. What matters is the truth of the story. Matthew was right, Jesus was the guy.

You're right, it doesn't matter how we have come to the conclusion as long as it's the right conclusion. However, there is a snag. If the way we got to that conclusion is flawed, isn't there a pretty good possibility that the conclusion is flawed as well? Imagine if we used that logic in any other part of our lives.

There four eye witnesses to a car crash. One says you weren't driving, two say you were driving a blue car and one says you were driving two blue cars. And you own a blue car, with no other data we can clearly see that you were the guy that caused that car crash. Hands down with no other possible alternatives.

You will be fined for the car crash even if your blue car was parked in the parking lot 4 blocks away.