Good, go away. I'm not interested in being taught by a sadist. What would you teach me anyway? How to not leave a mark?
Is the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment biblical or not?
- Thread starter Timotheos
- Start date
Good, go away. I'm not interested in being taught by a sadist. What would you teach me anyway? How to not leave a mark?
Someone who takes pleasure in the suffering of others is the DEFINITION of a sadist, it is not merely my "childish understanding". Go look it up.
yes, that's nice
yes, that's nice.
If you haven't noticed, I'm not trying to be "nice" to you. I want you to repent of your sadistic attitude.
Exactly my point.
Many times when scripture speaks of "death", it is not referring to a physical death of the flesh and blood body.
Same for "life" (not always about the physical life of the flesh and blood body).
Throughout scripture "death" is akin to separation.
Death of those with earthly flesh and blood bodies separates them from the living of the earthy flesh and blood bodies.
But both are still conscious.
The story of Lazarus and the rich man proves that.
Likewise, death of those without earthly flesh and blood bodies are also separated from the living without earthly flesh and blood bodies.
But both are still conscious.
The story of Lazarus and the rich man proves that also.
Actually, I would rather it be that way.
But it doesn't matter what you and I would want it to be.
Scripture teaches otherwise, and it is scripture that we must accept.
Scripture doesn't teach that the wages of sin is NOT death. Can't you see it? Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord".
And you kind of missed my point about the Prodigal Son. He was NOT dead, even though the father SAID he was dead. So him being conscious does not prove that dead people are conscious, because he was not dead. The parable of Lazarus and the rich man does not prove that dead people are conscious either. Does the story of the the three pigs prove that some pigs are better at building houses than other pigs? No, the story shows the value of hard work over the joys of the minute, and the value in being prepared. You can't take the details of a parable and write up a doctrine based on them. And don't even try to say "Aint a parable, has a name". There is no rule anywhere that says a parable can't have a name in it.
It certainly doesn't!
Yes, he was dead. Otherwise the scripture is false.
He was both dead and conscious.
What you have continually failed to recognize is all the connotations that scripture ascribes to the word "dead/death".
Such as:
"Let the dead bury the dead"
"I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living"
It does unless you think Jesus was teaching a mythical falsehood.
For this conversation, it does not matter if you call it a parable or not.
For Jesus did not use fantasies in His parables, but used reality.
Jesus didn't teach that story, so it is irrelevant.
Jordan Fontenot
New member
There is one verse that does not fit in the ETC argument. Matthew 25:46. The word aionios would have no reason to change meaning there so either punishment is eternal or heaven is not.
I believe that death is the punishment for sin (For the wages of sin is death), and I believe that punishment by death is eternal. It lasts forever.
There are two groups in Matthew 25:46, one group gets eternal life, the other group does not get eternal life. The ECTists are claiming that BOTH groups get eternal life. One in heaven and the other in hell being tormented alive forever. IF they are correct, then Matthew 25:46 is wrong, since both groups have eternal life.
TruthSetsFree
New member
we can't just go by the Bible... which is not interpreted within its covers...
the CHURCH produced the New T (the old church produced the Old T)
and only the Church can be trusted to teach what it means infallibly...
But that being said, logic alone would tell you that God hates sin... reality shows that...
anyone who has committed a mortal sin and then... gone to God and repented... knows how awful the consequences of the sin are... because mortal sin separates one from Him (and humans also, usually)
No, scripture doesn't say that he was dead. Scripture says that the father said he was dead. But he wasn't dead, he was alive. If he really was dead, he would not have been able to walk home. So your "proof" that dead people are conscious fails.
This shows that God is the God of the living, not dead people. It doesn't prove that dead people are really alive. God is going to resurrect the dead to life. God is the God of the living, after they are raised from death, they will be alive. They are not alive while they are dead, and this passage doesn't say that they are.
This also does not say that the dead are really alive.
Give me a break, Jesus is speaking metaphorically, He did that a lot.
Your "proofs" are underwhelming.
I can prove in a second that dead people are not conscious. Go to a morgue. Are the dead people conscious or unconscious? Dead people are unconscious. Otherwise they would object when you tried to bury them.
No, Jesus was using a parable to teach a lesson. It is not "teaching a mythological falsehood" to use a story to teach. He said "you will not believe even though someone rises from the dead". That was the point of the parable. They didn't believe Jesus even though He rose from the dead.
I just go by the Bible, and that is what this thread is about. If you want to say "The Catholic Church teaches that the wicked go to hell when they die where they are tormented alive forever", I wouldn't disagree with you.
TruthSetsFree
New member
well, u said Doctrine... not 'church'
and the RCC does teach that thse who do wicked things and dont repent end up in eternal misery
ppl who sin, even in this life, are in Hell... because they love evil... or at least dont hate it enough to ditch it...
they are in Hell already because Hell is where hate and abuse rule...
as St Leonard of Port Maurice puts it
They are damned because of their malice"
malice against God, manifested through malice against the humans he created
I believe you that the Carholic Church teaches it. I am a Christian, but I am not Catholic. I believe the Catholic Church was overly influenced by Pre-Christian Roman religion which taught that the wicked will go to the underworld when they die where they would suffer forever. I would like to get to the Apostolic Teaching before it was corrupted by Rome. Paul wrote that the wages of sin is death. So I believe that Paul believed that the wages of sin is death, not eternal conscious torment.
The Church rejected a book said to have been written by Peter describing hell in great detail. Before the Church was influenced by Augustine, they didn't believe in eternal conscious torment and rejected books that wrote about it. (The rejected book is "The Apocalypse of Peter". Mr Resurrected would enjoy it, it is a sadistic little book.)
God is not a sadist. He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. He grieves at the lost in hell and died so they don't have to go there.
Are you like the New Atheists who impugn the character of God from the Old Testament and accuse Him of being petty, sexist, genocidal, etc.?
If you knew the love and holiness of God, you would not mock His justice.
This is a loop hole (the effects are eternal, but the punishment is not). This is twisting, not exegesis.
We patiently explain your logical, exegetical fallacies, but you stubbornly don't get it.
Time for all of us to move on. I will defend and proclaim the biblical, historical, orthodox view because I accept revelation, not reason that elevates sentimental views above the rights and righteousness of God.
Catholics have extra/contrabiblical views on purgatory, indulgences, rosary, Mass, Mary, etc., but they are biblical on the trinity, virgin conception, Deity/resurrection of Christ, heaven, hell, Bible as the Word of God, etc.
It was Jesus who told the parable just as He wanted to tell it.
You think Jesus made up a parable with the father telling an untruth (lying) in it?
So God can't be the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob until they are resurrected???????
God says differently.
God said many times that He is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob ---- present tense, AFTER their bodies lay in the grave.
Soooooo, what did Jesus mean "metaphorically" to let the dead bury the dead?????
Corpses are only the body.
Bodies are placed in Oeber.
Soul/spirit is placed in Sheol.
There are many places of burial (oeber) where bodies are kept.
There is only one Hell (Sheol) where all the souls/spirits are kept.
So, you think Jesus used some untruth, a fantasy place where souls/spirits are conscious, to make a point?
Jesus never used an untruth in any of His parables.
What are you talking about? I never said that God is a sadist. I was talking about Mr resurrected because he said that he likes to watch people burn. What's wrong with you?
By implication, you are suggesting that God would be a sadist if the lake of fire involves conscious torment. This is a JW argument (yes, you are not a JW, but you are both wrong in this thinking).