Annihilationism and the NT
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-09-2013, 01:35 PM
 
RE: Annihilationism and the NT
PleaseJesus, where are you? You said you'd discuss annihilationism. Your turn.
Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2013, 02:18 PM
RE: Annihilationism and the NT
All:

My 1) 2) and 3) were based on the scriptures. I admit my interpretation is subjective, same as your understanding of the scriptures. Not my "evidence the Bible is true" but my interpretation of the scriptures.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2013, 02:19 PM
RE: Annihilationism and the NT
PS. PJ is also an INTJ. Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2013, 02:36 PM
 
RE: Annihilationism and the NT
(09-09-2013 02:18 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  All:

My 1) 2) and 3) were based on the scriptures. I admit my interpretation is subjective, same as your understanding of the scriptures. Not my "evidence the Bible is true" but my interpretation of the scriptures.

You never quoted where you got your 1), 2) and 3) from.
Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2013, 05:05 PM
RE: Annihilationism and the NT
(04-09-2013 09:16 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(04-09-2013 02:38 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  It is, however, a place of unending regret and severe discomfort, in a body that can handle more discomfort than we can now (and eternally does not require food, either).

2) The Bible is consistent on the issues. For example, you quoted Romans 2:7 about seeking eternal life without quoting other verses about other people finding god's wrath and indignation long after they've died.

Prove it. Everything about hell is illogical, and infantile.
Hell is not a Biblical concept. You make up shit, Pleasy, and expect reasonable people to buy it, because you say it. The BIble is UTTERLY INCONSISTENT. If hell didn't exist in the OT, to say it is "consistent", is 100 % bullshit, and YOU know it. Sheol is not a place of torment. Thanks for proving yet again, you actually know nothing about the Bible, or the culture it came from. Scholars agree. Paul thought immortality was only for the saved. The LONG history of the development of the notion of immortality is WAY beyond your level of infantile religious nonsense.
Sorry bucky ball, but I believe Please Jesus has said nothing wrong. Particularly because he used the phrase "endless loop" as a means of explaining what a fire that burns forever could mean. Not that what I say will matter to you, but I think it is a quite reasonable concept.

On another note, have you considered that anyone who does not understand the writings in the bible could feel legitimate claiming it is utterly inconsistent simply based on semantics?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2013, 05:21 PM
 
RE: Annihilationism and the NT
(09-09-2013 05:05 PM)childeye Wrote:  Sorry bucky ball, but I believe Please Jesus has said nothing wrong. (...) I think it is a quite reasonable concept.

This is the problem. Too many personal opinions and interpretations, too few facts. Neither you or PleaseJesus have so far quoted ONE SINGLE VERSE of the Bible, you just keep guessing around and proving your beliefs by assertion. Try responding with a proper, substantiated argument.
Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2013, 05:39 PM (This post was last modified: 09-09-2013 06:14 PM by childeye.)
RE: Annihilationism and the NT
(09-09-2013 05:21 PM)Philosoraptor Wrote:  
(09-09-2013 05:05 PM)childeye Wrote:  Sorry bucky ball, but I believe Please Jesus has said nothing wrong. (...) I think it is a quite reasonable concept.

This is the problem. Too many personal opinions and interpretations, too few facts. Neither you or PleaseJesus have so far quoted ONE SINGLE VERSE of the Bible, you just keep guessing around and proving your beliefs by assertion. Try responding with a proper, substantiated argument.
With all sincerity, we are discussing what was written about thousands of years ago. The only facts recognizable concerning hell and heaven is the concept that hell is undesirable to those who know heaven. Hence there is torment in hell but not in heaven. Consequently, if one does not believe in any place where there exists no poverty, death, pain and suffering, then the word "hope" essentially has no meaning. Personally, I would rather die in hope than live in fear. Therefore I see no place where opinions and interpretations or misinterpretations are avoidable. What exactly are quoting verses going to solve since any interpretation is questionable? Personally, I believe moral Truth is simple. Love others as you would want to be loved. If there is justice then let it be done since it is just. If there is no justice, then indeed there is no God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2013, 08:43 PM
RE: Annihilationism and the NT
(09-09-2013 05:39 PM)childeye Wrote:  With all sincerity, we are discussing what was written about thousands of years ago. The only facts recognizable concerning hell and heaven is the concept that hell is undesirable to those who know heaven. Hence there is torment in hell but not in heaven. Consequently, if one does not believe in any place where there exists no poverty, death, pain and suffering, then the word "hope" essentially has no meaning. Personally, I would rather die in hope than live in fear. Therefore I see no place where opinions and interpretations or misinterpretations are avoidable. What exactly are quoting verses going to solve since any interpretation is questionable? Personally, I believe moral Truth is simple. Love others as you would want to be loved. If there is justice then let it be done since it is just. If there is no justice, then indeed there is no God.

The only 'fact' we have about Hell is that it didn't exist in the OT as it does in the NT, and this is most probably because the NT authors lifted the idea from the concept of Hades. The actually existence of either realm is not 'known' by either of you, and to pretend to in fact actually know, is dishonest in the extreme.

Hope
-a feeling of expectation and desire for a certain thing to happen

Hope exists because humans have an imagination, and your supposed creator failed at making a perfect universe. Justice is a human concept, without humans around to conceptualize it, justice is meaningless. Are suns just? How about when they implode into super nova and leave behind black holes?

So in a way you are correct, without humans there would be no god, for he is made in our image; misogynistic, angry, ignorant, wrathful, and jealous.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2013, 03:28 AM
 
RE: Annihilationism and the NT
(09-09-2013 05:39 PM)childeye Wrote:  [I]f one does not believe in any place where there exists no poverty, death, pain and suffering, then the word "hope" essentially has no meaning.

Seriously, who cares?

(09-09-2013 05:39 PM)childeye Wrote:  Personally, I would rather die in hope than live in fear.

Fear of what?

(09-09-2013 05:39 PM)childeye Wrote:  Therefore I see no place where opinions and interpretations or misinterpretations are avoidable. What exactly are quoting verses going to solve since any interpretation is questionable?

This is a discussion about New Testament views on hell. If you think it is futile to discuss that, well nobody forced you to participate in this thread.

(09-09-2013 05:39 PM)childeye Wrote:  Personally, I believe moral Truth is simple. Love others as you would want to be loved. If there is justice then let it be done since it is just. If there is no justice, then indeed there is no God.

What if God's justice is different than you perceive it to be? What if the OT is right, and when you die, it turns out that you had to sacrifice pigeons for uncleanliness and whatnot?
Again, you're smuggling your personal ideas into something that's supposed to be absolute, like God's justice.
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Philosoraptor's post
10-09-2013, 02:23 PM
RE: Annihilationism and the NT
Quote:This is the problem. Too many personal opinions and interpretations, too few facts. Neither you or PleaseJesus have so far quoted ONE SINGLE VERSE of the Bible, you just keep guessing around and proving your beliefs by assertion. Try responding with a proper, substantiated argument.

Well, you're putting me in the precarious position of 1) quoting the Bible when I've been told on this forum not one word of the Bible is fact and I don't understand it myself (so why bother!) and 2) you want me to defend my point #3 as to how I understand from the Bible I'm not saved by works but by trusting god... really? After my 1) you want me to post 500 verses on this thread?

A person is saved by trusting god and not by their works (good deeds, lawful deeds, Mosaic law deeds, personal sincerity, repentance, church attendance, philanthropy, positive personal ethics, etc.). If someone is annihilated they have suffered "enough" in Hell to expiate their own sin and have paid for sin 100% without the intervention of Jesus or the atoning death and resurrection of Christ being necessary. I might walk through some of the many scriptures involved on this post in a Bible study. Why would I do so here?

Suffice it to say when atheists work incessantly to counter Pascal's wager by saying, "Why the Bible? Why not another of many religious faiths?" I found it always appealing that the Bible teaches simple trust in god while each other religion I've encountered says that doing something(s) saves one's soul, pays karma, eradicates ignorance/enlightens, etc.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: