Priest says Hell is an invention of the church to control people with fear

Yep- wheat and tares.


38The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;

39The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.



Glad to be of service;)





.

Thank you so much Daniel's 77th.

I'm sorry I missed your point.

I appreciate your patience.

You are welcome.

So which are you?


Wheat or tare?







:)

well...tare being a weed? I think...

I would share this quote with you...

Weeds are flowers too, once you get to know them. ~ Eeyore, Winnie the Pooh.

So I would say tare.

But maybe I am a dunce and do not understand you again. :)

Well, at least you are not lukewarm....





@)

But maybe I am a dunce and do not understand you again. :)

How do you feel about this video?

OP-


Is there something you want to learn from others?

Or do you feel that you have it all figured out?





?

I observe that you move behind a cloak of mystery.

The timing kinda matters, considering Jesus arrived 3000 or 4000 years after Adam & Eve. If Jesus had been the first to plainly declare that to die in sin earns us eternal life in a place of fiery punishment, we can only ask why God waited so ridiculously long to say something about it. We have no record that He mentioned one word about any such fate to A & E, to Cain, world's first murderer, nor Noah, Abraham, or even Moses, to whom He issued volumes of directives and instructions, including how to menstruate. All the punishments listed in the Law have to do with the here & now of this life on earth.

If hellfire is a real possibility for humans to suffer, why such conspicuous silence?
God always urged the prophets to plainly warn people of their predicament, lest blood be on their own hands for not speaking up. . .yet He Himself appears to have neglected for at least hundreds of years to alert His favored people of the *worst* possible fate imaginable. Why is this?

Meanwhile, ancient pagan cultures had all kinds of stories and rumors of damnation and underworlds of torment, in any number of variations. It was as if they were competing to see who could dream up the ugliest scenario.

It was just a question.


What do you want to know? (no cloak)






?

Hell has many names, one of them being the pit. It is found all over the Old Testament.

Deuteronomy 32:22 For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.

Job 17:16 They shall go down to the bars of the pit, when our rest together is in the dust.

As you can see already in Job the pit is talked about in great detail. And if you're as intelligent as you claim to be (I doubt it because you don't even know these simple things about hell) you know how old the book of Job is.

Job 33:28 He will deliver his soul from going into the pit, and his life shall see the light.


you can play smart all you want and spread your lies and half truths, you're still going straight to hell, with rest of the lost sinners.

Your problem is with God and your refusal to repent of your ungodliness. You're a rebel just like your dad Satan.
That's all, that doesn't take away from the fact that is hell, who cares what you think? You're just a self important asshat, totally worthless. Wel God thinks you have some worth wanting to save you but I think you're a pos. Just like the sodomite pos John Shelby Spong, you all suck, bottomfeeders.

My observation is that in many religions it is a bunch of men holding all the info and power. It is like layers upon layers of cloaked mystery. The higher you go the deeper the initiation into lies.

...

So that said...What is your take on this?

The lake of fire dies not consist of literal fire. I listed a bunch of things previously which God refers to as "fire", but which are not actual fire - they merely function like it, melting away debris and excess. It's herein where repentance will likely be *unavoidable*. Jonah describes it perfectly in his second chapter:

And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the LORD, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heardest my voice.

Once the wicked have done some time and recognized their folly and "come to themselves", like the Prodigal, they'll find the "gates" of new jerusalem wide open for them.

Ashes are an old testament symbol of humility and even helplessness. It seems like whenever someone got in over their head, they'd resort to sackcloth and ashes - it was almost like a white flag of surrender.

Check out Revelation 14:10, where we're told that the wicked "shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb".

Why would the Lamb be there, if indeed the "torment" is nothing more than vengeful torture? Do you suppose our humble Jesus is eager to view the suffering and agony of the lost?
Or, are they perhaps undergoing their discipline *inside* the presence of the Lamb? If God is a consuming fire, is it too preposterous to consider that perhaps the Lake of Fire is some aspect of God Himself?
We're told He's a Refiner, using "fire" to purify us as silver. We hopefully understand that throughout scripture, fire is symbolic of trials and testings, as mentioned by Peter. God's law itself is a "fire". Is it likely that we believers get mere symbolic fire, but unbelievers are given literal fire? Is this really how God does things?



The Greek word for "torment(ed)" here is basanizo.
This same word appears in the gospels a couple of times, but is translated differently. . .

Matthew 14: But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves: for the wind was contrary.

Mark 6: And he saw them toiling in rowing; for the wind was contrary unto them: and about the fourth watch of the night he cometh unto them, walking upon the sea, and would have passed by them.

Toiling and tossing is the nature of the "torment" they underwent on an actual lake. Struggling to row against the current is tough, but not exactly unbearable or inhumane. Perhaps this provides a little insight on the nature of the "torment" experienced in the Lake of Fire.

Ok ac 1503929 lets assume your position is correct.
Then the consequence of rejecting Christ's gospel in ones life time becomes: No longer the grave eternal separation from God, but rather, just an (unnecessary) extended separation.

So what was all the fuss about?
Why do martyrs pay with their life to bring us the message of salvation. Since in your example salvation is rendered as a choice of plan A or B.
Plan A: being the quick route to God with some great perks.
B: being the longer and more painful route to God.


So the wheat get all the benefits of salvation plan A. and the tares will have to pay a painful price for choosing plan B.
But in the end all will party with God in the New Jerusalem.

So therefore..when Jesus said "depart from me I never knew you" What he meant to say was "depart from me,I don't know you yet,come back later when you finally come to your senses"

And when Jesus said to the lukewarm "I will spew you from my mouth" what he really meant to say was "come back later when you have heated up"

And what of the Mark of the Beast. Is the message now.."well if you take it...don't worry...you can make up for it later and all will ok in the end."

I'm putting it in such simple terms, because for me it highlights the absurdity of the argument.

Why was Jesus rejected, despised and hated? If he was simply laying out two options of reconciliation to God.

What are we saved from? Have we been Saved simply from the less fortunate longer more painful way home to God? Some will say..well hey..I don't mind..I would rather live my life for myself,indulgent,selfish,debauched,sinful..and take the long painful way home.The payoff now is worth the cost later.



And what of Satan and his followers? Where do they end up? Some universalism teaching have Satan redeemed in the end too. If we follow your argument: all things have been redeemed by God meaning all free will in the end submits..then I guess that must include Satan.

Ok ac 1503929 lets assume your position is correct.
Then the consequence of rejecting Christ's gospel in ones life time becomes: No longer the grave eternal separation from God, but rather, just an (unnecessary) extended separation.

So what was all the fuss about?
Why do martyrs pay with their life to bring us the message of salvation. Since in your example salvation is rendered as a choice of plan A or B.
Plan A: being the quick route to God with some great perks.
B: being the longer and more painful route to God.


So the wheat get all the benefits of salvation plan A. and the tares will have to pay a painful price for choosing plan B.
But in the end all will party with God in the New Jerusalem.

So therefore..when Jesus said "depart from me I never knew you" What he meant to say was "depart from me,I don't know you yet,come back later when you finally come to your senses"

And when Jesus said to the lukewarm "I will spew you from my mouth" what he really meant to say was "come back later when you have heated up"

And what of the Mark of the Beast. Is the message now.."well if you take it...don't worry...you can make up for it later and all will ok in the end."

I'm putting it in such simple terms, because for me it highlights the absurdity of the argument.

Why was Jesus rejected, despised and hated? If he was simply laying out two options of reconciliation to God.

What are we saved from? Have we been Saved simply from the less fortunate longer more painful way home to God? Some will say..well hey..I don't mind..I would rather live my life for myself,indulgent,selfish,debauched,sinful..and take the long painful way home.The payoff now is worth the cost later.



And what of Satan and his followers? Where do they end up? Some universalism teaching have Satan redeemed in the end too. If we follow your argument: all things have been redeemed by God meaning all free will in the end submits..then I guess that must include Satan.

very well done...thank you

Hell has many names, one of them being the pit. It is found all over the Old Testament.

Deuteronomy 32:22 For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.

Job 17:16 They shall go down to the bars of the pit, when our rest together is in the dust.

As you can see already in Job the pit is talked about in great detail. And if you're as intelligent as you claim to be (I doubt it because you don't even know these simple things about hell) you know how old the book of Job is.

Job 33:28 He will deliver his soul from going into the pit, and his life shall see the light.


you can play smart all you want and spread your lies and half truths, you're still going straight to hell, with rest of the lost sinners.

Your problem is with God and your refusal to repent of your ungodliness. You're a rebel just like your dad Satan.
That's all, that doesn't take away from the fact that is hell, who cares what you think? You're just a self important asshat, totally worthless. Wel God thinks you have some worth wanting to save you but I think you're a pos. Just like the sodomite pos John Shelby Spong, you all suck, bottomfeeders.

eternal separation from God

So what was all the fuss about?
Why do martyrs pay with their life to bring us the message of salvation. Since in your example salvation is rendered as a choice of plan A or B.
Plan A: being the quick route to God with some great perks.
B: being the longer and more painful route to God.


So the wheat get all the benefits of salvation plan A. and the tares will have to pay a painful price for choosing plan B.
But in the end all will party with God in the New Jerusalem.

So therefore..when Jesus said "depart from me I never knew you" What he meant to say was "depart from me,I don't know you yet,come back later when you finally come to your senses"

And when Jesus said to the lukewarm "I will spew you from my mouth" what he really meant to say was "come back later when you have heated up"

And what of the Mark of the Beast. Is the message now.."well if you take it...don't worry...you can make up for it later and all will ok in the end."

I'm putting it in such simple terms, because for me it highlights the absurdity of the argument.

Why was Jesus rejected, despised and hated? If he was simply laying out two options of reconciliation to God.

What are we saved from? Have we been Saved simply from the less fortunate longer more painful way home to God? Some will say..well hey..I don't mind..I would rather live my life for myself,indulgent,selfish,debauched,sinful..and take the long painful way home.The payoff now is worth the cost later.

And what of Satan and his followers? Where do they end up? Some universalism teaching have Satan redeemed in the end too. If we follow your argument: all things have been redeemed by God meaning all free will in the end submits..then I guess that must include Satan.

So the same God who tells us to not let the sun go down on our wrath actually harbors a never-ending wrath for the lost?
Wouldn't that make Him a massive hypocrite?

He tells us to turn the other cheek and bless those who wrong us, but He *cooks* His enemies? Really?