Why would God need a hell?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mickiel

New member
punishment is what they get

Mat 25:46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

shame & everlasting contempt is what they feel

Dan 12:2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.



In my view, in the Kingdom of God , there will be more former believers that will be shamed , than unbelievers who have been given forgiveness. There will be rewards given in the Kingdom, maybe crowns of some type, and I think there will be former humans who made it, but believed some shameful things while they were human, and they will not have rewards. But one can live with shame. I think one of the most shameful things now, that I am aware of, is the perversion of the gospel of salvation. A gospel of everyone being saved, shamefully crippled and condensed into just a few being saved.

So then it will come down to things in the Kingdom like Isaiah 45:24, " Surely, shall one say, in the Lord I have righteousness and strength", and all that are incensed against that shall be ashamed!" Like the brother of the prodical son, many believers in God are incensed at giving salvation to those who reject Christ and are unbelievers; I think the shame will be on them.

But that's just my view.
 

Prizebeatz1

New member
And?

God The Father is also referred to as a stumbling stone (Isa 8.14, etc,).





Define 'soul'.

The stumbling stone for me was the literal interpretation of Jesus which I see as a temporary substitute for those who have yet to feel the true and infinite liberation, freedom and feeling of self-worth found in the soul. Jesus did little to help me feel this but I pretended because I wanted to believe I would be saved. It worked for a while but slowly it crippled me until the point I would rather be dead. I know for a fact I'm not the only one who has had such feelings. We don't have to wait until we hit rock bottom before awakening to the soul.

There is no definition of the soul but because of my strong Catholic background I approximate it as the infinite and eternal part of my being. It is the divinity within from which the church strangely steers people away. Isn't it convenient? Please be aware that the soul defines man. Man does not define the soul. It's the same for God because God and the soul are one and the same. One need be mad to try to define the undefinable. That's like a gnat trying to arm-wrestle a planet. No contest.
 
Last edited:

way 2 go

Well-known member
In my view, in the Kingdom of God , there will be more former believers that will be shamed , than unbelievers who have been given forgiveness. There will be rewards given in the Kingdom, maybe crowns of some type, and I think there will be former humans who made it, but believed some shameful things while they were human, and they will not have rewards. But one can live with shame. I think one of the most shameful things now, that I am aware of, is the perversion of the gospel of salvation. A gospel of everyone being saved, shamefully crippled and condensed into just a few being saved.
Jesus said narrow is the way

Mat 7:13 "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many.
Mat 7:14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.
Mat 7:15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
So then it will come down to things in the Kingdom like Isaiah 45:24, " Surely, shall one say, in the Lord I have righteousness and strength", and all that are incensed against that shall be ashamed!" Like the brother of the prodical son, many believers in God are incensed at giving salvation to those who reject Christ and are unbelievers; I think the shame will be on them.
1Co_6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,


But that's just my view.

Your view is wrong
 

Mickiel

New member
Let me show you something about one of the churches of God, one of the stages it always goes through. In Rev. 2: 13-17 it describes the church in Pergamos, and this description fits any church of God now that is doing the same thing they were doing at that time. In verse 14 Jesus clearly has a " Few things against them", so it was more than just one offence against Christ. What Jesus really did not like, in fact in vs. 15 Jesus said he " Hated" this thing HIS church was doing. They held to " The doctrine of Balaam", or the doctrine of the Nicolitians. Well what are those?

To put in short terms, its paganism. Holding to pagan doctrines is something Jesus hates. And Christianity is full of pagan doctrines and holidays. From Easter and Christmas, to church buildings and stained glassed windows, boys choirs and funeral processions, wearing crosses, wedding rings and statues, the list is so long it would literally shock you!

Pagan influence, still living in the bloodstream of Christianity.
 

Prizebeatz1

New member
Jesus said narrow is the way

Mat 7:13 "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many.
Mat 7:14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.
Mat 7:15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.

1Co_6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,




Your view is wrong

Just because one person's view is different does not necessarily mean it is wrong. There are many ways to see things. Some might be more or less accurate or some might have more pieces of the puzzle than others but that doesn't necessarily make one right and one wrong. If we are both painting a bowl of fruit and your angle shows a pear but mine does not, does that mean one is wrong? Who are we to judge anyway? It is not our place to judge. Our job is to love. Biting of the forbidden fruit and not knowing when to quit is what sealed my own coffin. Please learn a lesson from me and don't let it happen to you too.
 

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
...Gen. 6:5...[A]lready God is thinking of destroying them all. But he lets it continue on up onto this day.

Why?
Payday someday. :eek:linger:

"Is 51:21, 22 drunk but not with wine. Jerusalem was drunk through drinking the cup of God’s wrath (63:6). But, in contrast to Babylon, which drank the fury of God’s wrath to the last drop (v. 17; Rev. 18:6), Israel will have the cup removed before all the wrath is consumed. It will be handed to Israel’s oppressors for them to drink the full fury (49:26; Jer. 25:15, 26, 28; Zech. 12:2)." MacArthur, J., Jr. (Ed.). (1997). The MacArthur Study Bible (electronic ed., pp. 1035–1036). Nashville, TN: Word Pub.
 

Aimiel

Well-known member
I have used 370 scriptures in this thread, and will use a lot more. You can't pick 370 cherries that were not there to pick. You refused to answer the question , because you can't or you won't. That's one reason I keep count of the bible verses I use, because Christians like using smoke screens to cloud a thread, like accusing me of cherry picking scriptures. 370 scriptures is a lot of scriptures;

goodness, maybe the bible is a cherry book, full of ripe cherries to pick, since there are so many of them there to pick. Cherries ripe with the salvation of all, and the end of the Christian hell.

Obviously, you have a different Bible than I have. No Scriptures in my Bible disputes the facts It gives us regarding hell, at all. 'Cherry-picking' accusations don't speak about what you agree with as much as it describes what you choose to ignore. Your ignorance is clear.
 

Mickiel

New member
Obviously, you have a different Bible than I have. No Scriptures in my Bible disputes the facts It gives us regarding hell, at all. 'Cherry-picking' accusations don't speak about what you agree with as much as it describes what you choose to ignore. Your ignorance is clear.



Right now I have a King James Black Heritage Edition, my Moffat edition got stolen. And my ignorance is clear to me as well, that is WHY I study, to learn and understand how to rightly divide, or figure out the meaning,of God's word that is truth. I am ignorant of many things about God and Christ, I mean I wish I wasn't, but I am. They both are a mystery to me , I hope to one day understand them, but I guess its not today. But my hopes are still alive for that day to come. I tend to learn just a little each passing year.

I have learned, In John 17:2 that God actually gave Jesus power over ALL humans, to just literally " Give them eternal life!" And that just thrills me! I certainly cherry pick that one. In fact, its the ripest cherry I have.
 

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
The Spirit's Book part 3

The Spirit's Book part 3

~*~*~

Continuing from here as promised,...here are 2 more addresses that share the indignity and injustice of the traditional assumption of 'eternal punishment' -

~*~*~

"Wars of words! wars of words! has not enough blood been already shed for words, and must
the fires of the stake he rekindled for them ? Men dispute about the words 'eternal
punishments,' 'everlasting burnings;' but do you not know that what you now understand by
eternity was not understood in the same way by the ancients ? Let the theologian consult the
sources of his faith, and he, like the rest of you, will see that, in the Hebrew text, the word
which the Greeks, the Latins, and the moderns, have translated as endless and irremissible
punishment, has not the same meaning. Eternity of punishment corresponds to eternity of
evil. Yes; so long as evil continues to exist among you, so long will punishment continue to
exist; it is in this relative sense that the sacred texts should be interpreted. The eternity of
punishments, therefore, is not absolute, but relative. Let a day come when all men shall have
donned, through repentance, the robe of innocence, and, on that day, there will be no more
weeping, wailing, or gnashing of teeth. Your human reason is, in truth, of narrow scope; but,
such as it is, it is a gift of God, and there is no man of right feeling who, with the aid of that
reason, can understand the eternity of punishment in any other sense. If we admit the eternity
of punishment, we must also admit that evil will be eternal; but God alone is eternal, and He
could not have created an eternal evil, without plucking from His attributes the most
magnificent of them all, viz., His sovereign power; for he who creates an element destructive
of his works is not sovereignly powerful. Plunge no more thy mournful glance, 0 human race!
into the entrails of the earth, in search of chastisements ! Weep, but hope; expiate, but take
comfort in the thought of a God who is entirely loving, absolutely powerful, essentially just."

PLATO

"Union with the Divine Being is the aim of human existence. To the attainment of this aim
three things are necessary-knowledge, love justice: three things are contrary to this aim - ignorance,
hatred, injustice. You are false to these fundamental principles when you falsify
the idea of God by exaggerating His severity; thus suggesting to the mind of the creature that
there is in it more clemency, long-suffering, love, and true justice, than you attribute to the Creator. You
destroy the very idea of retribution by rendering it as inadmissible, by your minds, as is, by
your hearts, the policy of the Middle Ages, with its hideous array of torturers, executioners,
and the stake. When the principle of indiscriminating retaliation has been banished for ever
from human legislation, can you hope to make men believe that principle to be the rule of the
Divine Government ? Believe me, brothers in God and in Jesus Christ, you must either resign
yourselves to let all your dogmas perish in your hands rather than modify them, or you must
revivify them by opening them to the beneficent action that good spirits are now bringing to
bear on them. The idea of a hell full of glowing furnaces and boiling cauldrons might be
credible in an age of iron; in the nineteenth century it can be nothing more than an empty
phantom, capable, at the utmost, of frightening little children, and by which the children
themselves will no longer be frightened when they are a little bigger. By your persistence in
upholding mythic terrors, you engender incredulity, source of every sort of social
disorganisation; and I tremble at beholding the very foundations of social order shaken, and
crumbling into dust, for want of an authoritative code of penality. Let all those who are
animated by a living and ardent faith, heralds of the coming day, unite their efforts, not to
keep up antiquated fables now fallen into disrepute, but to resuscitate and revivify the true
idea of penality, under forms in harmony with the usages, sentiments, and enlightenment of
your epoch.

"What, in fact, is 'a sinner' ? One who, by a deviation from the right road, by a false
movement of the soul. has swerved from the true aim of his creation, which consists in the
harmonious worship of the Beautiful, the Good, as embodied in the archetype of humanity,
the Divine Exemplar, Jesus Christ.

"What is 'chastisement' ? The natural, derivative consequence of that false movement; the
amount of pain necessary to disgust the sinner with his departure from rectitude, by his
experience of the suffering caused by that departure. Chastisement is the goad which, by the
smarting it occasions, decides the soul to cut short its wanderings, and to return into the right
road. The sole aim of chastisement is rehabilitation; and therefore, to assume the eternity of
chastisement is to deprive it of all reason for existing.

"Cease, I beseech you, the attempt to establish a parallelism of duration between good,
essence of the Creator, and evil, essence of the creature; for, in so doing, you establish a standard of penality that is utterly without
justification. Affirm, on the contrary, the gradual diminution of imperfections and of
chastisements through successive existences, and you consecrate the doctrine of the union of
the creature with the Creator by the reconciliation of justice with mercy."

PAUL, APOSTLE


The above addresses touch on the injustice and irrationality of ECT, and this primarily on principle alone. In these case as we've discussed already with the translation of particular verses, it is always with reason, conscience and the sense of fairness, logic and equity already inherent in the soul of man, that we must weigh any doctrine or 'belief', and when a variance in 'translation' of any 'scripture' appears it must be translated in accordance to that standard and principle of reason, while any other 'translation' not in accord with the goodness, mercy, justice of God must be abandoned.

I share these interesting messages from the 19th century to broaden our view and deepen our insight into the divine mercy and the laws that govern the soul's evolution and progress towards perfection(purity) - these addresses particularly are from a group of spirits teaching in the broader context the principles of 'Spiritism' (codified by Allan Kardec in that time period)....so 'reincarnation' or 'plurality of existences' are a part of the theology, in which soul's are given multiple life experiences to evolve, grow, learn, purify and perfect themselves. So with that in mind, we can see that from this school of thought, there is no 'hell' existing anywhere as a location in space necessarily, but each soul makes for itself its own 'heaven' or 'hell' by its own condition of consciousness, level of moral purity, degree of development, etc. On a broader level,...'heaven' and 'hell' are qualities of consciousness, and by the law of progress, all souls eventually advance towards happiness and harmony with divine law by gravitating towards God, thus fulfilling their purpose of existence.
 
Last edited:

Apple7

New member
The stumbling stone for me was the literal interpretation of Jesus which I see as a temporary substitute for those who have yet to feel the true and infinite liberation, freedom and feeling of self-worth found in the soul. Jesus did little to help me feel this but I pretended because I wanted to believe I would be saved. It worked for a while but slowly it crippled me until the point I would rather be dead. I know for a fact I'm not the only one who has had such feelings. We don't have to wait until we hit rock bottom before awakening to the soul.

There is no definition of the soul but because of my strong Catholic background I approximate it as the infinite and eternal part of my being. It is the divinity within from which the church strangely steers people away. Isn't it convenient? Please be aware that the soul defines man. Man does not define the soul. It's the same for God because God and the soul are one and the same. One need be mad to try to define the undefinable. That's like a gnat trying to arm-wrestle a planet. No contest.


You seem to be confusing the two separate terms 'soul' and 'spirit'.
 

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
you misunderstand 'karma',.....its law

you misunderstand 'karma',.....its law

your god of karma but not the real God


The principles I shared stand. You are apparently not understanding what 'karma' is, and its dynamics....yet it still stands that what a soul sows, that also it shall reap. Actions bear consequences, in all dimensions or realms, this life and the afterlife. As long as there is cause/effect you cannot escape this law. You have a misconstrued concept of 'karma'.

you tried and failed to refute Matt. 25:46

I treated it rightfully here.

if karma were true Jesus would not have had to die

False equation. There is no reason to believe this, unless your presupposing or assuming an 'atonement' of some kind behind Jesus death. Even still,....."God(universal law) is not 'mocked' (it cannot be put aside or derided),...whatever a man sows, that also must he reap". An avatar, savior, demi-god, holy man may grant you grace and atone for some degree of personal or planetary karma, but this does not abrogate or take away your own personal self-responsibility for your own sins, and expiating those sins by your own repentance and reformation. You cant just put all your sins upon another person and assume they've take on all your karmic debts, and you get a free pass into heaven. Universal laws hold. Grace is given, of course because God is love....but you must do your part, YOU are responsible.

God was crucified for our sins
which was the only way to pay for sins
that deserve eternal punishment

See above.

you don't have God's Holy spirit
your all about interpreting the bible by karma
I will mock karma as it leads people to hell

You're misconstruing 'karma', by not understanding it. It is also called the 'law of compensation; law of retribution; law of cause/effect; action/consequence. A rightful understanding of this law, deters people from sin and suffering, you have it backwards, plus have a warped view about 'eternal punishment' which we've clarified elsewhere.
 

Aimiel

Well-known member
I have learned, In John 17:2 that God actually gave Jesus power over ALL humans, to just literally " Give them eternal life!" And that just thrills me! I certainly cherry pick that one. In fact, its the ripest cherry I have.

Just because you attempt to twist that verse to say, "Every soul shall be saved," doesn't change it's true contextual meaning to say what you've decided it means.
 

Prizebeatz1

New member
You seem to be confusing the two separate terms 'soul' and 'spirit'.

No I'm not. The connotation of the spirit is that it exists outside of us. The soul is internal. The spirit depends on time for its existence. The soul does not. What is your definition of spirit?
 

Prizebeatz1

New member
You got it bass ackwards, brother...

We need to have a serious look at this. If you're talking of the spirit as I think you are then it's pretty much a derivative of the Holy Spirit. Please advise if my assumption is incorrect. Let's go there. I certainly don't want there to be any misunderstandings.
 

Apple7

New member
We need to have a serious look at this. If you're talking of the spirit as I think you are then it's pretty much a derivative of the Holy Spirit. Please advise if my assumption is incorrect. Let's go there. I certainly don't want there to be any misunderstandings.


Observe this passage...


But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in Spirit and in Truth. For the Father also seeks such, the ones worshiping Him. God is Spirit, and the ones worshiping Him must worship in Spirit and Truth. (John 4.23 - 24)


First of all, God is Spirit.....God is not 'soul'.

Thus....spirit is eternal.


Secondly, the above passage informs the reader that proper worship to God is Triune.

Father
Son(Truth)
Spirit
 

Prizebeatz1

New member
Observe this passage...


But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in Spirit and in Truth. For the Father also seeks such, the ones worshiping Him. God is Spirit, and the ones worshiping Him must worship in Spirit and Truth. (John 4.23 - 24)


First of all, God is Spirit.....God is not 'soul'.

Thus....spirit is eternal.


Secondly, the above passage informs the reader that proper worship to God is Triune.

Father
Son(Truth)
Spirit

Okay. What about this Holy Spirit? Was it available to us before Jesus breathed on the disciples or not?
 

Apple7

New member
Okay. What about this Holy Spirit? Was it available to us before Jesus breathed on the disciples or not?

The Triune God has always revealed Himself as Triune, even in the OT, as thus...


God The Father was known as:

• Yahweh
• Elohim ‘God’
• El Elyon ‘God Most High’ (Gen 14.18, 19, 20, 22)
• El Olam ‘God Eternal’ (Gen 21.33
• Adonai Yahweh ‘Lord Yahweh’ (Gen 15.2, 8)


God The Son was known as:

• El Shaddai ‘God of Mighty Ones’ (Gen 17.1, 28.3, 35.11, 43.14, 48.3, 49.25; Exo 6.3)
• Elohim ‘God’ (Gen 16.13, 22.12, 31.13; Exo 3.6)
• The Malek Elohim ‘The Messenger of God’ (Gen 21.17; 31.11)
• The Malek Yahweh ‘ The Messenger of Yahweh’ (Gen 16.7, 9 - 11; 22.11, 15)
• Debar Yahweh ‘The Word of Yahweh’ (Gen 15.1, 4; Exo 9.20, 21)


God The Spirit was known as:

• The Ruach of Elohim ‘Spirit of God’ (Gen 1.2)
• The Ruach of Yahweh ‘Spirit of Yahweh’ (Gen 6.3)
 

Prizebeatz1

New member
The Triune God has always revealed Himself as Triune, even in the OT, as thus...


God The Father was known as:

• Yahweh
• Elohim ‘God’
• El Elyon ‘God Most High’ (Gen 14.18, 19, 20, 22)
• El Olam ‘God Eternal’ (Gen 21.33
• Adonai Yahweh ‘Lord Yahweh’ (Gen 15.2, 8)


God The Son was known as:

• El Shaddai ‘God of Mighty Ones’ (Gen 17.1, 28.3, 35.11, 43.14, 48.3, 49.25; Exo 6.3)
• Elohim ‘God’ (Gen 16.13, 22.12, 31.13; Exo 3.6)
• The Malek Elohim ‘The Messenger of God’ (Gen 21.17; 31.11)
• The Malek Yahweh ‘ The Messenger of Yahweh’ (Gen 16.7, 9 - 11; 22.11, 15)
• Debar Yahweh ‘The Word of Yahweh’ (Gen 15.1, 4; Exo 9.20, 21)


God The Spirit was known as:

• The Ruach of Elohim ‘Spirit of God’ (Gen 1.2)
• The Ruach of Yahweh ‘Spirit of Yahweh’ (Gen 6.3)

You didn't answer the question. Why? And is the spirit separate from us or not?
 

Apple7

New member
You didn't answer the question. Why? And is the spirit separate from us or not?

The Holy Spirit was available to mankind in the OT, as thus...

And Yahweh said, My Spirit shall not always strive with man; in their erring he is flesh. And his days shall be a hundred and twenty years. (Gen 6.3)


We are not spirit.

We have a spirit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top