Man Conceived Religions

[Highway54]

I have a good idea of what hell is.


What have I said that God is going to do? As my post shows, it is both justice and love. For God to annihilate people would undermine the idea that we have intrinsic value as beings created in his image. That would be unloving and, depending on how you answer my questions, unjust for a lot of people.


Sheol: 67
Hades: 10


Depends on the version. In the ESV, Sheol is most often left as "Sheol" (65 times) but translated as "grave" once as "pit" once. Hades stays as is 9 times and translated as "hell" once (Matt 16:18). In the NASB, both Sheol and Hades stay as it throughout.


Yes.


Is this not the same as question 2?


The abode of departed souls, as I have stated already.

Hell is just an English word used for final destination of the unrighteous, which isn't Hades. I would appreciate it if you answered the two questions I asked:

One problem with annihilationism, which it seems you believe, is that it is unjust. Those very same people that you say committed minor offenses suffer the same punishment as people like Hitler and Stalin. In order for it to be just, there must be punishment that fits the offense, don't you agree? When does that happen?

One problem with annihilationism, which it seems you believe, is that it is unjust. Those very same people that you say committed minor offenses suffer the same punishment as people like Hitler and Stalin. In order for it to be just, there must be punishment that fits the offense, don't you agree? When does that happen?

I wanted to answer this separately Free, you are totally correct. I do not feel annihilation is unjust, similar to common sense law criminals have to be separated from society. Wicked and meek simply cannot co exist, so they have to be separated. The Bible is clear that they will be removed from the earth, and I support that. We do not believe God is going to torture anyone.

Since God offers life and death, and since all who have died have been acquitted of sin Rom 6:7, 23, with the exception of those who have sinned against the holy spirit, they are not judged by what they did in this life, thus do not have a punishment for such.

The final judgment for all except those of the first resurrection Rev 20:6 is when satan is released at the end of the thousand years, those who now have life eternal v5, who choose to follow satan will be cast into the lake of fire for their permanent destruction/annihilation, thier second death. I know this may be new to you, and it is quite involved, but understandable. So when does it happen? At the end of the millennial reign of Christ.

 

[Highway54]

God is evil???

Is He? Do you teach He is going to torture people eternally Jay? If you do then why would you worship Him sir? I wouldn't.

 

[jaybo]

Again with the fallacious false dichotomy. You, too, have completely ignored all the verses I have given in support, as well as left the majority of my arguments unaddressed, and relied much on erroneous reasoning. Why is that? I have the truth of the gospel, it's just that I believe the entirety of what the NT states, including the words of Jesus himself.

No, you think that you have the truth of the gospel, but so do others who disagree with you. I and others also believe the entirety of what the NT states, and we disagree with your interpretation. Why do you think you have perfect understanding?

 

[jaybo]

Is He? Do you teach He is going to torture people eternally Jay? If you do then why would you worship Him sir? I wouldn't.

You are the one who wrote "Time will tell how evil God is, and I think we are very near to finding out" (post #332) I never said that God is evil. I wrote "God is evil???" Those symbols at the end are called "question marks".

 

[PrimFinallyFoundGod!]

WOW this is a spicy thread

 

[Fastfredy0]

Not really, Jaybo has the truth of the Gospel. Free has the law and religion, which has been abolished, Ephesians 2:15. "Christ is the end of the law (religion) for righteousness for those that believe" Romans 10:4.

Well, though I don't agree with your theological conclusion on the subject I give you props for citing scripture to support your case.

 

[Fastfredy0]

Is He? Do you teach He is going to torture people eternally Jay? If you do then why would you worship Him sir? I wouldn't.

It is definitely entertaining to read the conclusions of those with the following mindset:
Premise 1: God is just and loving and righteous and merciful, etc.
Premise 2: I define what it is to be just and loving and righteous and merciful, etc.
Conclusion: God would never violate my definitions of what He is like so I will find a way to mold scripture so premise 1 and premise 2 are always true.

Example: God is love therefore He is fair and therefore He must love everyone and therefore He is obligated that all have a chance to be saved and therefore prevenient grace, age of accountability doctrine, Jesus goes to hell to give people second chance, annihilation, purgatory, yahda, yahda, yahda.

.... and usually there is a couple of verses that can be used to support their case
.... and thus the hermeneutic to use to compare explicit verses to implicit verses .... good luck

 

[Robert Pate]

Again with the fallacious false dichotomy. You, too, have completely ignored all the verses I have given in support, as well as left the majority of my arguments unaddressed, and relied much on erroneous reasoning. Why is that? I have the truth of the gospel, it's just that I believe the entirety of what the NT states, including the words of Jesus himself.

Then you don't believe that the law has been abolished for Christians, Ephesians 2:15.

 

[Fastfredy0]

Then you don't believe that the law has been abolished for Christians, Ephesians 2:15.

This is complicated as the Bible uses the word Law in many ways and doesn't distinguish the differences well leading to confusion.
The Law being referred to in Eph 2:15 is various ordinances that are being put aside and not the entire law.

Commentary 1
God ended the Mosaic Law as His rule of life for the Jews. The word “abolished” (Gr. kataresas) means “rendered inoperative.” The Mosaic Law ceased to be God’s standard for regulating the life of His people (Rom. 10:4; et al.). The Mosaic Law had been the cause of the enmity between Jews and Gentiles. Its dietary distinctions and laws requiring separation, in particular, created hostility between Jews and Gentiles. The NASB translation implies that the law was the barrier. Really it was the cause of the barrier between Jews and Gentiles. Jesus Christ destroyed the barrier and the hostility that resulted from it by terminating the Mosaic Law. Tom Constable

Commentary 2
even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; which consisted of many precepts, and carnal ordinances; and is so called because it was an indication of God's hatred of sin, by requiring sacrifice for it; and because it was an occasion of stirring up the enmity of the natural man, it being a burden and a weariness to the flesh, by reason of its many and troublesome rites; and because it was the cause of enmity between Jew and Gentile .. John Gill

I grant your interpretation might be one of several that is possible .... so we look to other scripture to see if it fits your hypothesis that the ENTIRE LAW has been set aside.

So we have:
1 John 2:3 And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him,

It seems obvious that the entire law (commandments) have not been set aside as 1 John speaks of keeping his commandments which explicitly means the entire Law has not been set aside as you presume from Eph. 2:15


Aside:

What is the difference between the ceremonial law, the moral law, and the judicial law in the Old Testament?​

See https://www.gotquestions.org/ceremonial-law.html

Aside2: The use of the word LAW in scripture is often confusing
Nomos (Law) is used in the New Testament in a number of senses, much like its English equivalent. In a negative sense, it sometimes refers to legalism, the strict, self-dependent trust in one’s own efforts to perform to the level of divine morality (see Luke 18:9). Sometimes it refers to the commandments and ceremonial rituals prescribed by God in the Old Covenant through Moses. Sometimes it refers simply to divine standards in general. Sometimes it refers to the entire body of Scripture that God had revealed before the time of Christ, what we now call the Old Testament. Sometimes it is a synonym for a general principle or rule. In interpreting the New Testament, therefore, the specific meaning must be determined from the context. John MacArthur – New Testament Commentary

Good luck

 

[Free]

I want to thank you very much for the effort and sincerity you put in answering my questions Free, truly. Most people do not care enough to do so.

You're welcome.

May I ask what you believe God is going to do to those who are judged as goats?

They go to "eternal punishment" as per Matt 25:46.

No sir, they are defined as the abode of the dead

Right, which I have stated.

Being the abode of the dead, all persons go there. It has nothing to do with righteousness or unrighteousness, as you are aware Jesus also went there when he died, and was resurrected out of it. All persons in it will be resurrected and hell will be emptied, and no longer necessary will be cast into the lake of fire, ceasing to exist.

Here is where a problem arises. You asked me what the meanings of "Sheol" and "Hades" were, but now you are implicitly bringing in gehenna. You are essentially equating Hades with gehenna. However, gehenna is the final destination of unbelievers and, apart from one instance of Hades and one of tartaroo, is the only word translated as "hell" in the ESV and other versions. This is the fault of the KJV for translating three different NT words as "hell."

You will notice that I said: "Hell is just an English word used for final destination of the unrighteous, which isn't Hades." Jesus used the metaphor of gehenna for the final destination of the unrighteous, and Revelation says it's the lake of fire. Therefore, gehenna is the lake of fire, which is Hell proper.

 

[jaybo]

Free, no response to post #363? I'll repeat it here...

No, you think that you have the truth of the gospel, but so do others who disagree with you. I and others also believe the entirety of what the NT states, and we disagree with your interpretation. Why do you think you have perfect understanding?

 

[Free]

I wanted to answer this separately Free, you are totally correct. I do not feel annihilation is unjust, similar to common sense law criminals have to be separated from society. Wicked and meek simply cannot co exist, so they have to be separated. The Bible is clear that they will be removed from the earth, and I support that. We do not believe God is going to torture anyone.

So, according to the passage from Luke 12 that I provided, there are degrees of punishment for unbelievers. If everyone is annihilated when thrown into the lake of fire, then when does that punishment take place? If not in the lake of fire, then those unbelievers who die just prior to Christ's return or are alive at the time of judgement, just simply get annihilated, even if they were as evil as Hitler, alongside those who were relatively decent people. Is that justice?

Since God offers life and death, and since all who have died have been acquitted of sin Rom 6:7, 23, with the exception of those who have sinned against the holy spirit, they are not judged by what they did in this life, thus do not have a punishment for such.

"All who have died," including unbelievers?

Rom 6:4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.
Rom 6:5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.
Rom 6:6 We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin.
Rom 6:7 For one who has died has been set free from sin.
Rom 6:8 Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. (ESV)

This is only speaking of believers and in the spiritual sense of having been "buried with him by baptism into death" and "crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing."

The final judgment for all except those of the first resurrection Rev 20:6 is when satan is released at the end of the thousand years, those who now have life eternal v5, who choose to follow satan will be cast into the lake of fire for their permanent destruction/annihilation, thier second death. I know this may be new to you, and it is quite involved, but understandable. So when does it happen? At the end of the millennial reign of Christ.

No, not at all new to me. I just don't see anywhere in the Bible where the lake of fire results in annihilation.

 

[Free]

WOW this is a spicy thread

Some of these Theology threads do get spicy and, in this case, unnecessarily so. But some of these things really do matter.

 

[PrimFinallyFoundGod!]

Some of these Theology threads do get spicy and, in this case, unnecessarily so. But some of these things really do matter.

No I totally agree!

 

[Hopeful]

Since God offers life and death, and since all who have died have been acquitted of sin Rom 6:7, 23, with the exception of those who have sinned against the holy spirit, they are not judged by what they did in this life, thus do not have a punishment for such.

The "those who have died" in Rom 6 are those who have been killed with Christ at their water baptism into His death.
So to say "all who have died have been acquitted of sin" is really a misnomer.
Had you said "all who have died with Christ have been acquitted of sin", I would agree with you.

 

[Free]

Then you don't believe that the law has been abolished for Christians, Ephesians 2:15.

You need to delineate a little more. Of course, there has always been debate in Christianity as to what the Christian's relationship is to the Law of Moses. What is absolutely clear is that we are not justified by the Law of Moses. You haphazardly throw around the word "law" as though anything that is a rule or command is law. This is why I have continually had to point out the fallacy of equivocation.

In so doing, you are ignoring context. This shows that the issue is more complex than you seem to think it is.

"That’s a tricky question because Mosaic law is usually divided into at least three different segments. There is the moral law, which involves the Ten Commandments and expositions of the Ten Commandments. Then there is this civil law, which is the law that was peculiar to the state of Israel as a theocracy. And then there’s the ceremonial law, which was done away with or fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

The first is the only one that’s binding upon the consciences of Christians, and that is the moral law. The Westminster Confession, which is my own confession, speaks of the “general equity” of the civil law, as it is applicable in a very different set of circumstances in a modern democratic state as opposed to a theocracy."

https://www.ligonier.org/learn/qas/how-should-christians-relate-to-the-law-of-moses

Having said all that, I stand by what Jesus and John said:

Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

Joh 15:9 As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Abide in my love.
Joh 15:10 If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love.
Joh 15:11 These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full.
Joh 15:12 “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.
Joh 15:13 Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.
Joh 15:14 You are my friends if you do what I command you.

1Jn 2:3 And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments.
1Jn 2:4 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him,
1Jn 2:5 but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him:
1Jn 2:6 whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.

Notice the multiple uses of "command" and "commandments" (found throughout 1 and 2 John), and that those who claim to love Jesus and know him, "ought to walk in the same way in which he walked." In addition to the clear and obvious commands which the believe needs to obey, it is important to understand that "ought" is an obligation. That isn't some mere suggestion.

1Jn 4:11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.

3Jn 1:8 Therefore we ought to support people like these, that we may be fellow workers for the truth.

Similarly with "must" (used 118 times in various ways):

Joh 4:24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”

Rom 15:1 We who are strong have an obligation to bear with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves.

2Co 9:7 Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

Tit 1:7 For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain,
Tit 1:8 but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined.
Tit 1:9 He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.

1Jn 4:21 And this commandment we have from him: whoever loves God must also love his brother.

(All ESV.)

I could post many more verses, as I have done several times previously, showing the numerous rules and commands for believers to follow.

On the one hand, we can make the argument that these have nothing to do with the Law of Moses. However, they are all about how Christians are supposed to live, how we are expected by God to live, how we ought to live. As such, without going through all of them, simply because they are so numerous, it likely is the case that they all fit into one of two categories:

Mat 22:36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?”
Mat 22:37 And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.
Mat 22:38 This is the great and first commandment.
Mat 22:39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
Mat 22:40 On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.” (ESV)

They are ultimately based on the moral law. So, as I stated, it's complicated.

 

[jaybo]

You need to delineate a little more. Of course, there has always been debate in Christianity as to what the Christian's relationship is to the Law of Moses. What is absolutely clear is that we are not justified by the Law of Moses. You haphazardly throw around the word "law" as though anything that is a rule or command is law. This is why I have continually had to point out the fallacy of equivocation.

In so doing, you are ignoring context. This shows that the issue is more complex than you seem to think it is.

"That’s a tricky question because Mosaic law is usually divided into at least three different segments. There is the moral law, which involves the Ten Commandments and expositions of the Ten Commandments. Then there is this civil law, which is the law that was peculiar to the state of Israel as a theocracy. And then there’s the ceremonial law, which was done away with or fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

The first is the only one that’s binding upon the consciences of Christians, and that is the moral law. The Westminster Confession, which is my own confession, speaks of the “general equity” of the civil law, as it is applicable in a very different set of circumstances in a modern democratic state as opposed to a theocracy."

https://www.ligonier.org/learn/qas/how-should-christians-relate-to-the-law-of-moses

Having said all that, I stand by what Jesus and John said:

Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

Joh 15:9 As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Abide in my love.
Joh 15:10 If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love.
Joh 15:11 These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full.
Joh 15:12 “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.
Joh 15:13 Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.
Joh 15:14 You are my friends if you do what I command you.

1Jn 2:3 And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments.
1Jn 2:4 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him,
1Jn 2:5 but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him:
1Jn 2:6 whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.

Notice the multiple uses of "command" and "commandments" (found throughout 1 and 2 John), and that those who claim to love Jesus and know him, "ought to walk in the same way in which he walked." In addition to the clear and obvious commands which the believe needs to obey, it is important to understand that "ought" is an obligation. That isn't some mere suggestion.

1Jn 4:11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.

3Jn 1:8 Therefore we ought to support people like these, that we may be fellow workers for the truth.

Similarly with "must" (used 118 times in various ways):

Joh 4:24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”

Rom 15:1 We who are strong have an obligation to bear with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves.

2Co 9:7 Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

Tit 1:7 For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain,
Tit 1:8 but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined.
Tit 1:9 He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.

1Jn 4:21 And this commandment we have from him: whoever loves God must also love his brother.

(All ESV.)

I could post many more verses, as I have done several times previously, showing the numerous rules and commands for believers to follow.

On the one hand, we can make the argument that these have nothing to do with the Law of Moses. However, they are all about how Christians are supposed to live, how we are expected by God to live, how we ought to live. As such, without going through all of them, simply because they are so numerous, it likely is the case that they all fit into one of two categories:

Mat 22:36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?”
Mat 22:37 And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.
Mat 22:38 This is the great and first commandment.
Mat 22:39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
Mat 22:40 On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.” (ESV)

They are ultimately based on the moral law. So, as I stated, it's complicated.

This is all quite complicated. Paul explains it much more simply in Romans 7. Here is an excerpt...

Romans 7:4-6, "In the same way, my brothers and sisters, you have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead in order that we may bear fruit for God. For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that we are enslaved in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the written code."

Now, why doesn't Paul divide "the law" (as you do) into a) the moral law, b) the civil law, and c) ceremonial law? Because that is an artificial division, created by people to justify their interpretations. When Paul refers to "the law" he means the entire OT law. So should you and others.

 

[Christ_empowered]

I lean Calvinist. I am currently not in church largely because of my past and current status as a barely tolerated often openly despised outcast. And yet…

All religions have important social functions. The sociology of religion is a fascinating field on the interplay between religion and the rest of society. So…

To me Christianity is all about Jesus Christ. At the core there’s something…almost existential about having to come to Jesus in this world and then face judgment in the next…

But Christianity is still a religion albeit the one true faith. So the social functions are probably more important at least from a believer’s perspective than is the case with other religions.

I think one reason the church is vital is because a bit of knowledge is dangerous or can be. So too is brainwashing so there’s that.,,

 

[Fastfredy0]

Now, why doesn't Paul divide "the law" (as you do) into a) the moral law, b) the civil law, and c) ceremonial law? Because that is an artificial division, created by people to justify their interpretations.

Well, you have a point there.
Some laws changed with Christ like what you could eat, but what laws are and aren't applicable from the O.T. is a mess.
Aside: 9 of the 10 commandments Moses brought down from mount 'whatever' can be found in the New Testament, but the Sabbath still controversial with many a long diatribe written for supposed clarification. You get enough people agreeing to their ideas on what the laws are applicable and the masses will follow. You won't find laws classified by the bible as moral, ceremonial and judicial law (unless you read between the lines maybe)

The division of the Jewish law into different categories is a human construct designed to better understand the nature of God and define which laws church-age Christians are still required to follow. Many believe the ceremonial law is not applicable, but we are bound by the Ten Commandments. All the law is useful for instruction (2 Timothy 3:16), and nothing in the Bible indicates that God intended a distinction of categories. Christians are not under the law (Romans 10:4). Jesus fulfilled the law, thus abolishing the difference between Jew and Gentile "so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross…" (Ephesians 2:15-16). https://www.gotquestions.org/ceremonial-law.html

 

[Highway54]

You are the one who wrote "Time will tell how evil God is, and I think we are very near to finding out" (post #332) I never said that God is evil. I wrote "God is evil???" Those symbols at the end are called "question marks".

Why did you not answer my question Jay? Do you believe God is going to torture people eternally in a hell of fire and brimstone?