Bible-bots: "fire" = "teeth" = trouble

[link to biblewheel.com]

God uses "fire" to purify, correct? This fire consists of trials, tribulations, etc., yes? It's a metaphor.

Please consider the notion that both "hell" and the Lake of Fire do not consist of *literal* fire, and that its intent is to purify those who find themselves cast therein.

Perhaps God maybe possibly isn't a spiteful sicko like we think.

I sure as hell wont be preaching to the god your talking about. he's one deranged motherfucker, bitter as fuck, and thinks pranking is fun on an excistensial level. Not getting my vote.

Love. is god. Not some old bearded gay who wants to punish you with eternal pain for not doing as told. Kinda power trippy, eh? why make us in the first place....

I'll be very honest with you.

I was curious to know a bit more but I do perceive that it is difficult to have discussion with you minus what I find to be a sarcastic and insistence on rightness in the undertone. (from this end)

I really just wanted to talk without all that stuff.

But, this is strictly my perception and does not dictate that this is in fact what you are doing. Your perception may be completely different.

Certainly you may have formed your own perception of my approach to dialog for good or bad.

I guess we just don't 'mesh.'

Oh well....sorry for the thread drift.

b. 2 Thess 1:7-9 "This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power." NIV


To sum it all up, this puts an end to the question.


e. Rev 20:14-15 "Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire

OP, I don't get it. (really)

Are you trying to convince people that Hell is temporary and all will be saved? If so for what purpose, and to whom?

What I am asking is.....who are you trying to reach? The saved? The unsaved?

If you are trying to reach the saved who are not going to Hell, why? If you are trying to reach the unsaved what is the message to them?

(Of course you are not obligated to answer any of those questions, but, I am curious.)


Just wanting to spread the truth, to anyone interested. A Person's character can be slandered and distorted heavily by what people claim He does.

I'll be very honest with you.

I was curious to know a bit more but I do perceive that it is difficult to have discussion with you minus what I find to be a sarcastic and insistence on rightness in the undertone. (from this end)

I really just wanted to talk without all that stuff.

But, this is strictly my perception and does not dictate that this is in fact what you are doing. Your perception may be completely different.

Certainly you may have formed your own perception of my approach to dialog for good or bad.

I guess we just don't 'mesh.'

Oh well....sorry for the thread drift.



I can be pretty sarcastic, but seriously don't feel I've even leaned that way here. Just asking lots of significant questions.

Here's the part where I offer links. . .


[link to www.godfire.net]

"103 REASONS TO BELIEVE IN GOD'S SOVEREIGNTY AND THE SALVATION OF ALL"

--
[link to www.askelm.com]

"The Real Meaning of Lazarus and the Rich Man"

--
[link to www.tentmaker.org]

"This little work is written for the purpose of furnishing a sketch of the argument by which it is shown that the doctrine of Endless Punishment is not of divine origin, but traceable directly to a heathen source."

--

Bottom line is, go with what you're comfortable with. If I'm in left field with this, disregard it all.

[link to biblewheel.com]

God uses "fire" to purify, correct? This fire consists of trials, tribulations, etc., yes? It's a metaphor.

Please consider the notion that both "hell" and the Lake of Fire do not consist of *literal* fire, and that its intent is to purify those who find themselves cast therein.

Perhaps God maybe possibly isn't a spiteful sicko like we think.

WOW, you twist scripture to fit your ideas almost as good as your Father...the Devil. I think labeling a place as "lake of Fire" is as literal as it can be, only those who do not understand the Justice of God cannot comprehend these things, you are just another Spiritual retard thinking that you are a theologian.

[link to biblewheel.com]

God uses "fire" to purify, correct? This fire consists of trials, tribulations, etc., yes? It's a metaphor.

Please consider the notion that both "hell" and the Lake of Fire do not consist of *literal* fire, and that its intent is to purify those who find themselves cast therein.

Perhaps God maybe possibly isn't a spiteful sicko like we think.



the fire is Himself, God is a consuming fire, and you are correct, it purifies and cleanses us of the lies we have believed.

nada

As for links and the like.....I was trying to move beyond this Hell or no Hell debate and talk about the motivations and the implications of the debate itself on a deeper level.

As for links and the like.....I was trying to move beyond this Hell or no Hell debate and talk about the motivations and the implications of the debate itself on a deeper level.

I think we all try to share what we think is truth. We preach the gospel because we believe in Jesus, while non-believers claim its all BS, Muslims promote Allah, etc. That's about the extent of my motivation.
I believed in the traditional hell for 20+ years, and only within the past 2 or 3 got the urge to re-examine its validity in light of scripture. Hopefully, though, I'll turn out to just be another nut-job going against the immovable mainstream beliefs of western christianity.

As for links and the like.....I was trying to move beyond this Hell or no Hell debate and talk about the motivations and the implications of the debate itself on a deeper level.

I think we all try to share what we think is truth. We preach the gospel because we believe in Jesus, while non-believers claim its all BS, Muslims promote Allah, etc. That's about the extent of my motivation.
I believed in the traditional hell for 20+ years, and only within the past 2 or 3 got the urge to re-examine its validity in light of scripture. Hopefully, though, I'll turn out to just be another nut-job going against the immovable mainstream beliefs of western christianity.


Well, I suppose that you don't mind the drift or you would not have responded. :)

I am curious because I don't often get an opportunity to discuss these matters with a person who believes as you do. In fact, I don't often get a chance to discuss with people who believe as I do either because I no longer attend church.

I am curious....you said you believed in a 'traditional hell' for 20+ years. Is it too personal to ask where you got that idea? Was it from your previous examination of Scripture that was perhaps not as detailed as your closer examination, or is that what you first learned from a church, or perhaps other people?

What I mean is where did your first idea of hell come from?

Secondly, may I assume from this comment:

"Hopefully, though, I'll turn out to just be another nut-job going against the immovable mainstream beliefs of western christianity."

......that it is all of western Christianity (soley) that holds a belief in a traditional hell? I ask because western Christianity has all sorts of varied beliefs. For example, there are mainstream (and quite popular) ministers that preach within western Christianity that there is not a traditional hell. Those mainstream people are typically what is referred to as Universalists, and there are a plethora of churches in America that embrace that doctrine. So, I guess what I am not understanding is where your belief in a temporary hell goes against the mainstream.

Also, do you believe that there are Christians that believe in a 'traditional hell' who have based that conclusion on much the same approach that you have yourself? Meaning, do you recognize that there may be people who do believe in a 'traditional hell' based on their close examination of Scripture?

And why is it that you used the term 'nut job?' I find that interesting in that that suggests a preconceived notion that a person who believes in a traditional hell would automatically assume you to be a 'nut job.'

What incentive would we have to do good and love God if we knew we could reject His Son and choose to do evil all of our lives and never be punished?

As for links and the like.....I was trying to move beyond this Hell or no Hell debate and talk about the motivations and the implications of the debate itself on a deeper level.

I think we all try to share what we think is truth. We preach the gospel because we believe in Jesus, while non-believers claim its all BS, Muslims promote Allah, etc. That's about the extent of my motivation.
I believed in the traditional hell for 20+ years, and only within the past 2 or 3 got the urge to re-examine its validity in light of scripture. Hopefully, though, I'll turn out to just be another nut-job going against the immovable mainstream beliefs of western christianity.


Well, I suppose that you don't mind the drift or you would not have responded. :)

I am curious because I don't often get an opportunity to discuss these matters with a person who believes as you do. In fact, I don't often get a chance to discuss with people who believe as I do either because I no longer attend church.

I am curious....you said you believed in a 'traditional hell' for 20+ years. Is it too personal to ask where you got that idea? Was it from your previous examination of Scripture that was perhaps not as detailed as your closer examination, or is that what you first learned from a church, or perhaps other people?

What I mean is where did your first idea of hell come from?

Secondly, may I assume from this comment:

"Hopefully, though, I'll turn out to just be another nut-job going against the immovable mainstream beliefs of western christianity."

......that it is all of western Christianity (soley) that holds a belief in a traditional hell? I ask because western Christianity has all sorts of varied beliefs. For example, there are mainstream (and quite popular) ministers that preach within western Christianity that there is not a traditional hell. Those mainstream people are typically what is referred to as Universalists, and there are a plethora of churches in America that embrace that doctrine. So, I guess what I am not understanding is where your belief in a temporary hell goes against the mainstream.

Also, do you believe that there are Christians that believe in a 'traditional hell' who have based that conclusion on much the same approach that you have yourself? Meaning, do you recognize that there may be people who do believe in a 'traditional hell' based on their close examination of Scripture?

And why is it that you used the term 'nut job?' I find that interesting in that that suggests a preconceived notion that a person who believes in a traditional hell would automatically assume you to be a 'nut job.'


(The nut job comment was based on various GLP encounters I've had. I assume that not all christians preaching something against the grain are labeled deluded or deceived by other believers, though I have seen it happen.)

I believed in the traditional hell merely because it was the predominant view, and I had no reason to question it. It's what I was exposed to in church and the radio ministries I listened to. I don't recall when I first heard it suggested that sinners might *not* end up in eternal fire upon their death, but even the very notion was an obvious lie of the devil - how could it not be?
Then I encountered someone here on GLP preaching that God was actually Good and Able, and that His plan included the ultimate redemption of everyone, and that our revered Human Free Will was no match for God's great enterprise. This was clearly a deception, and I argued against it some, but realized that to really pull the plug on such a false doctrine, I should examine what it's based on. I started to do some digging, but found what I was not expecting. My acceptance of what I've presented through this thread didn't occur overnight, but has solidified over time as I constantly re-assess, and objectively seek and pray for guidance. If something is unscriptural, I don't want it. Yet it remains, and myself, my worldview, and my walk with the Father have never been the same. I'm thoroughly convinced that all, even hardened, blinded, insolent blasphemers, will eventually submit to Salvation.

Perhaps this view is more widespread than I realize, which would be a good thing. All I know is I've generated some pretty hardcore rebuttles and warnings from people for suggesting that God isn't quite like we think. Like Nebuchadnezzar, some folks get enraged when you disrespect their idols. They'll quote their King James and say "END OF DISCUSSION" and so forth.

People hold their specific beliefs for any number of reasons, evidenced by the wide range of doctrines (some conflicting one another) all based upon the same book.

Oh, I get the nut job comment now. It seems you were referring to reactions you have actually experienced due to your viewpoint on hell. I too have experienced being called a nut job for whatever reason. I guess maybe we all have.

That sure was a thorough and objective response. (IMO) I did not think that you arrived at these conclusions overnight. These are important matters in our walk and It seemed to me that you are not a 'fly by night' sorta guy. That's why I asked the things I did. (knowing you would potentially have well thought out answers)

Have to agree that a traditional hell was a more prevalent idea in the past than it is now. (re: your comment about a prominent view) Although a belief in either no hell or a temporary hell has been around for all of time (in different formats) it does seem that in western culture it is more prevalent now. There is nothing new under the sun but beliefs may take on different forms and cycles in time.

I think all we can do is exactly what you stated: "constantly re-assess, and objectively seek and pray for guidance." In truth that is what our walk on earth is all about, IMO. I think that if we go back to the garden we can see that what God wanted was for man to rely upon and be intimately connected to Him for daily guidance, wisdom, and fullness of life. In other words....a relationship based on love and trust. Seems when man attempted to go around that and decide these things about his human life for himself, the results were devastating. So I agree it is best to let God have that authority rather than to trust in ourselves or any other human person. Trusting in anything like self, idols, symbols, human theories, etc. etc. only leads to confusion.

Like you my walk is progressive and constantly renewed and refreshed. (not your words exactly but the gist of them) Although I have not been guided to the same conclusions you have regarding certain matters, I would not ever suggest that you are not genuinely experienceing what you say you are. And I trust from your response, you may say the same about me.

One thing I am certain of (hell aside) is that we are brothers in spirit. Therefore, the last thing I wish to do to my own family is to say or do anything that would bring disrespect or harm to the body. This debate CAN get pretty heated I know. That's why I do not typically get involved in direct talks about hell, rapture timing, and a select few other topics. But, some may be more apt, equipped, or called to engage in such things. (Not for me to judge that.)

When all is said and done....it seems we will both someday be in Heaven with God. We will even meet there. That tends to take a front seat to any differences we may have.

I certainly appreciated your candid response. It's nice to get to know people on a bit deeper level.

[link to biblewheel.com]

God uses "fire" to purify, correct? This fire consists of trials, tribulations, etc., yes? It's a metaphor.

Please consider the notion that both "hell" and the Lake of Fire do not consist of *literal* fire, and that its intent is to purify those who find themselves cast therein.

Perhaps God maybe possibly isn't a spiteful sicko like we think.




Do you think that God is a spiteful sicko?

[link to biblewheel.com]

God uses "fire" to purify, correct? This fire consists of trials, tribulations, etc., yes? It's a metaphor.

Please consider the notion that both "hell" and the Lake of Fire do not consist of *literal* fire, and that its intent is to purify those who find themselves cast therein.

Perhaps God maybe possibly isn't a spiteful sicko like we think.




Do you think that God is a spiteful sicko?


I think he is suggesting that anyone who believes in a literal Hell is misrepresenting God as a 'spiteful sicko.' And, that he believes that those who believe that are in fact the sickos.

(IMO, of course)