Not really...
10 reasons I don’t believe in Hell
Rather than reinvent the wheel of my own views on "Is There a Real Hell Fire" I'd like to share the thoughts of John Wright, whose perspectives are my own. I realize that in the COGs and Fundamentalist views, "It's in the Bible" is the ultimate answer to every question about is there a real Hell or Lake of Fire awaiting those who aren't with whatever the program is. I have been cast headlong and often into the Lake of Fire by the faith filled here. Some seem to resent and wish me ill because I have not only evolved out of the World Wide Church of God and not picked a splinter or denomination to continue belief in , but that I no longer take the Bible as literally or authoritative as I once did. It seems to be something they can't wait to see happen as I am sure it will confirm to themselves that they, not I, was more correct in their views about all things theological and real.
I firmly believe in each to their own. If YOU think I should go into a Lake of Fire for not seeing the world or the Bible through YOUR eyes, then post your own story and we'll all take a look at it. Don't hide behind your anonymity or fear of your church friends finding you here on Banned. Grow a pair as they say.
Be like the guy in my last birthday card:
Why is it so hard to hire older men?
Interviewer: "So tell me sir, what do you think is one of your negative traits?"
Older Gentleman: "My absolute honesty"
Interviewer: "Oh my, I don't think THAT's a negative trait at all!"
Older Gentleman: "I don't give a shit what you think..."
Took way too long to get to that point in life, but I have arrived.
That being said, there is liberation being able to say "I don't care what the Bible says" about this or that topic or that it doesn't matter what the Bible says, we know better now, or should. I know those are words that most would choke on. But for me, after years of experience in ministry, all things church, study of origins and theology as well as quick to notice "that just doesn't seem right to me" perspective, , I personally can say that on this topic of Hell or the Lake of Fire, it does not matter what the Bible says. The myth of Hell or the Lake of Fire is a concept that should not exist, could not exist and does not exist. Not only because it clearly has evolved over time in the scriptures and the minds of Bible literalists but also that it simply is lame and shows a God to be less than all powerful, loving and just. You'd think that would be Good News, but it is not to most. Many here just can't stand it if I am not going to be sorry and "think different when you are thrown in it."
It, like all doctrines and beliefs, has evolved from other cultures before the Bible (Mainly Egyptian) and is not an original truth to the Bible. It fills our need to know what happens to the wicked since I am trying so hard to be nice and go to heaven or be worthy of the Wonderful World Tomorrow and they can't get away with not being like me. I certainly don't want to do this for nothing. Religion itself flows naturally from our conscious fear of death and the question of "what is going to happen to me when I die." To answer it, we make stuff up that comforts us.
" John Wright's work shares a broad focus on what people believe and why. His most recent feature-length documentary focuses on the famous evangelical preacher Tony Campolo and his son Bart Campolo, who stopped believing in God at the age of 50 and stepped away from Christian ministry (Leaving My Father’s Faith, 2017). The film revolves around an in-depth conversation between the father and his son resulting from Bart’s departure from faith. As the son of a Presbyterian minister, John has long been interested in the questions answered by religion"
By John Wright
Do you believe in Hell? If so, and if you’re from the Christian tradition like me, you probably believe it’s a place you go when you die to be punished for things you did while alive. A fiery place of torture worse than any you can imagine. Suffering that lasts forever and ever, and only believing in Jesus can get you out of it. Right?
Yeah, I don’t believe that. Here are my top ten reasons why.
(1) What we call ‘sins’ are just natural human traits
Deceitfulness, selfishness, coveting, idolatry, masturbation, hubris, boastfulness, hatred, lust, envy and many more ‘sins’ have one thing in common: most people do them, because they’re within the range of normal human behavior and easily explained by our biology as expressed in our genes. What supreme being creates life with a set of attributes and then demands it stop exhibiting those attributes under pain of eternal torture? (Even the less common, more reprehensible sins of humankind – murder, rape, child abuse, etc. – have roots we can often understand and explanations in the social sciences.)
(2) The punishment of ancestral sin is inherently unjust
The doctrine of original sin states that all humans are born sinful, because their ancestors sinned and brought the rest of humanity down with them. But think about that. If our government arrested one of its citizens, tried them and executed them for a crime their parent or, worse, grandparent or, worse, some great- great- ancestor committed, everybody would swiftly cry injustice. We would immediately, instinctively and rightly object that the crime wasn’t committed by the arrested party at all, but by someone they’d never met and who merely happened to pass along their genes to the new, unwitting generation. What kind of God allows the punishment of the wrong person and calls it justice? (Some Christians do not hold to the most drastic forms of this doctrine, that we are collectively guilty because of the sins of our ancestors, or the one known as ‘total depravity’, but instead say that the sins of our ancestors gives us a tendency toward sin. This is little better. No deity I believe in is so cruel as to allow damnation for his creations because they have a baked-in tendency to do things this deity calls ‘bad’.
(3) Punishment for the absence of belief amounts to unbelievable cruelty
Evangelicals believe that salvation from Hell is tied directly to belief in God. But people disbelieve for a variety of reasons that are easy to understand. Sometimes people lack belief because they are predisposed to analytical thinking and have not been able to become convinced of God’s existence. Sometimes it’s because they lack the ability to sufficiently grasp the abstract. Sometimes they haven’t landed upon the ‘right belief’ among the jungle of ideas around them. Sometimes it’s because their personalities predispose them to find peace and happiness in other religious or nonreligious movements and ideas, or because they were born in a country with another religion entirely and taught the falsehood of the Christian one their entire lives. Whatever the reason, what divine entity would make the truth of his existence as ambiguous as it is and then demand that people believe it under pain of eternal torture? (Or, just as bad, demand intellectual dishonesty from people who simply haven’t been convinced? What should they do? Feign belief as though they held it? Fake it till they – somehow – make it?)
(4) Eternally-wrought vengeance cannot be considered loving or just
Jesus specifically refutes ‘eye-for-eye’ justice, so why would the entire cosmic justice system revolve around the same, obviously inferior idea? Human societies have already developed more sophisticated theories of justice which are not based on vengeance. So, then, what God – especially an all-knowing, benevolent one – still holds to it? Vengeance of this kind is simply incompatible with these characteristics of God.
(5) Rehabilitation and restoration are more desirable than retribution
It is better to restore someone than to destroy them. Even human beings know that rehabilitation and restoration are more desirable results than retribution. What supreme being would opt for the latter? An all-powerful God would be competent enough to bring about the former.
(6) A remnant in Heaven cannot be considered a victory
The bible speaks of the broad road that leads to ‘destruction’, interpreted by most Christians as Hell, and the narrow road that leads to ‘life’, interpreted by most Christians as Heaven. But why would God allow a future where many billions of souls suffer forever in anguish while the relatively few celebrate in Heaven? What kind of celebration could that possibly be? Christian theology asserts that God wins in the end. But no victory would be more hollow than managing to hold on to the faithful few while the beloved, unbelieving many spend eternity in great suffering. In any analogous circumstance, nobody would consider it any victory at all. In summary: it’s difficult to celebrate over the sounds of screaming. (You may say that victory cannot be measured in numbers. But the eternal states of individuals are important, if they will exist for eternity as religious people believe. Given this, the only number that makes sense – of humans suffering in Hell for all eternity while a loving, just God exists – is zero.
(7) Hell extends disproportionate consequences for finite acts
Even if we did decide that retribution is a valid form of divine justice, it cannot be disproportionate and also just.(Note: Forever and ever is a long time) Evangelicals believe that the least of their sins would warrant Hell, all by itself. So a child who lies about doing their homework, for example, would be deserving of eternal torment just for that alone, rather than the punishment being, say, merely to be lied to in return. Not even those most committed to retributive justice would accept this utterly disproportional form of it if they didn’t feel they had to. Moreover, when we see disproportional punishment within human societies, we instinctively and rightly consider it injustice. (Take Hitler, for an oft-cited example. He brutally slaughtered millions, out of what seemed like pure evil. But he didn’t do it forever! His ovens have long been cold, his guns silent. His actions lasted a finite time. So, even eye-for-eye retribution against Hitler would only allow us to ‘kill him back’ a finite number of times. Hell for eternity – even for Hitler – would be disproportionate punishment for his sins.)
(8) Christian ideas of Hell are based on dubious interpretations of biblical words
Modern biblical scholars generally agree that the words translated as ‘Hell’ in the English versions of the bible started in ancient Jewish belief not as a place where punishment was dispensed, but as a subterranean underworld of forgetfulness, a place of unconscious, silent existence for everybody who had ever died. Sheol was the original word that referred to this concept in Hebrew, later translated into the Greek word Hades, which brought with it an entire mythology to the concept of the underworld. This was distinct from the Greek concept of Tarturus, which was a place of punishment distinct from Hades. The originators of these ideas believed they were physical places under the earth. By tracing the concepts through history, it is easy to see that they have been misappropriated and conflated together to create what became the evangelical Christian doctrine of Hell, but that doesn’t give much confidence in the idea of it being true. ‘Eternal fire’, ‘Lake of fire’ and other terms are thrown around in metaphor in the New Testament, before Hades itself is thrown into the lake of fire after all the dead people are emptied out of it (Revelation 20). How can Hell be sent to Hell? It seems obvious that these terms have been dubiously utilized.2
(9) The idea that people are ‘choosing Hell’ is an abhorrent one
Christians often say that people have a choice to make between accepting Jesus’ offer of salvation or rejecting it. If they ‘reject’ it, they are thus ‘choosing Hell’ as their permanent future. The existence of this choice may be obvious to them, but most people do not conceive that there is such a choice to make. For the vast majority of people who live and have ever lived, the details, consequences and existence of such a choice is extremely ambiguous, obscure or even completely imperceptible. They either haven’t been rationally convinced that they must consider the matter seriously, or they have barely heard of it. Everyone, upon having the truth of such a choice miraculously and unambiguously revealed to them, would immediately choose eternal reward over eternal suffering. Nobody in a functional frame of mind would actively choose pain and suffering in the manner that is claimed; that is an obvious truth. It is a falsehood, then, to imagine that accepting the reality of this choice ‘by faith’, out of ignorance rather than knowledge, is a virtue. What would God be testing for, if this is how it works? Gullibility? Why would blind faith in the unseen be the value God wants to reward? What’s so important about blind belief? It doesn’t make sense, so it’s very likely to be wrong.
(10) This doctrine is Christian theology minimizing its own central tenet
The central tenet of Christianity is that God sent his son Jesus to suffer and die for the sins of the world so the people of the world wouldn’t have to. Is this ‘grace’ enough to accomplish the transformative feat of bringing salvation to humankind? Or does the story end with, ‘If only humankind had accepted it!’ Ironically, therefore, Christians who believe in eternal Hell for the unbelieving are minimizing their own Savior’s sacrifice and his power to save. Salvation of the few by blind faith would not be even remotely as powerful as salvation of the many by grace.
There are many more, I’m sure (for example, we could make note of the fact that, from a certain perspective, it’s very easy to see how our worst fears can combine with our ideas about vengeance and our instincts about justice and the desires of organized religion to control, giving us some other very good ways to explain belief in Hell other than its actual existence). But those are the first ten that occurred to me.
62 comments:
Why is raising questions about God or the Bible always a rant?
A better question is why do people think they need to destroy those who have produced the written word that supports Christianity. There is nothing gained when the Christian faith is destroyed in a person’s life. One of the things I always pointed out when there was a conflict regarding the biblical messages was how does this conflict effect a person’s life. Will make either party a better person or add to the problems that already exist. It is obvious that Dennis has a problem excepting the value of the written word so my question to him is what has been gained if you destroyed the Christian Faith in the whole world. To me these postings are doing more damage than good in creating unified people whether in the churches or the world today. ASB This was a comment for an earlier post, but it fits here.
It would be easy to address each of these points made from a different perspective, but for this man and others that believe the same, addressing the why or validity of a hell fire will never move a person off of the foundation that he stated which said: "Why would blind faith in the unseen be the value God wants to reward? What’s so important about blind belief? It doesn’t make sense, so it’s very likely to be wrong".
If someone has reached 50 years of age and has been actively engaged in a religion and has come to the conclusion that all there is - is a "blind faith", then it is time to walk in a different way of life.
Most don't realize how fine the line is between there being a God who can make something out of nothing and nothing out of something, and it just being a make believe farce waiting for the next gullible person to come along and partake of.
We in the COG atmosphere have experienced what men can do or not do in a "religious" environment and that has affected each of our life perspectives whether we would admit that or not. What keeps one person on one side of the line and another person moving to the other side of the line is tied directly to life experiences. My Mother literally ran out of the Catholic Church at the age of seven and never looked back to any religion period except with disdain. What prompted such a decisive life decision at such a early age? when her Catholic Nun teacher noticed that my Mother hadn't eaten her green peas for lunch, the Nun actually walked backed to the kitchen and grabbed a whole bowl of peas and coming back to my Mother opened her mouth and tilted her head up and poured the bowl of peas down her throat. My courageous Mother vomiting pea soup out of her mouth, ran out of the church and to her home some 15 houses away.
Personally, as anyone involved intrinsically with the mob would say - I have seen too much to leave. But after two tours of COG-NAM, I can equate with a God who says "I shall not always strive with man (flesh)" Gen 6:3. And one way of making that happen is with the "Lake of Fire".
John Wright's understanding of Christianity is based on his Reformed background. In fact his entire essay is not directed towards Christianity but towards Calvinism and Arminianism. I am a hopeful universalist and I see the concept of hell much differently yet based on scripture. You can consult the writing of Robin Parry or Tom Talbott on this.
Wright's purpose is to take Christianity to task and he thought the Doctrine of Hell would be an easy purchase on the subject. But there are some ideas that he should have learned in Sunday School that are not present in his writing.
We are hominids and have all the nasty tendencies towards sinfulness he describes. This is due to the fact that we are a product of biological competition. Wright asks how God could let this process happen then expect us to be anything else. It is because of Imago Dei and the giving of the Holy Spirit. (Could Neanderthal sin? I don't think so. We would describe his behavior as animalistic rather than sinful.)
Wright's essay is not so much about hell as it is about someone's mistaken notion of what Christianity is. He should have spent more time in Sunday School.
Nowadays scientists are too sophisticated to believe in hell and in boogie men like Satan. But they still believe we are all going to hell because global warming will heat up the earth and melt it and kill us all. Probably by some time next week. People who drive cars are the new demons.
...what has been gained if you destroyed the Christian Faith in the whole world.
More is lost than gained.
"Grow a pair ..."
I have a challenge for you. Walk into the middle of a gang and just punch one of them in the face. You know he deserves it. Just do it. See what happens. Grow a pair yourself.
regardless of our "beliefs", the soul what sins shall surely die...
c f ben yochanan
There is a lot that can be said on the subject of Hell, but using the subject to destroy the Christian faith shows a lack of understanding of the whole of God and Jesus Christ's role in the bible. Fire can be seen as destructive but it can also be used for many uses. What I look at any more is the attitude of those who are posting and commenting. What I do not like to see is what appears to be an effort to destroy the Christian Faith without looking at the fact that Christianity has played a dominate role in encouraging positive changes in people who have a belief in God. Human beings are made to reflect God's image just as Jesus Christ was sent as God's image. If we cannot see that in the Bible it is because we believe our mind has a better picture of reality. ASB
To me these postings are doing more damage than good in creating unified people whether in the churches or the world today.
The controllers of the publishing industry want to destroy all religion so they can remake the world along their new "value" system and then create a global system that they totally control. That's why they are attacking Christianity so hard in the West, often using bad arguments. They don't care about truth or using fair arguments. They just want the destruction of opposing ideologies. This is how they always did it in the past, even to the point of outlawing religion (i.e. USSR) and sending their opponents to the gulags, etc.
"If we are not able to ask skeptical questions to interrogate those who tell us that something is true... To be skeptical to those in authority, then we are up for grabs to the next charlatan, political or religious (idea) that comes ambling along."
"Competing doctrines are after what feels good and not about what is true."
"What is faith...it is belief in the absence of evidence. The idea is to withhold belief until there is evidence for it."
Carl Sagan
carl sagan is dead...
"Hell" for me would not to be authentic, honestly curious about what is so and what might not be so and honest about the thoughts and experiences we have in life but that most never express either out of fear or the mistaken notion they have no right to express it. It is possible as well that the cost of expressing authenticity and honesty might be too high to wish to engage in. I assume some here are anonymous because of that.
Anonymous said...
carl sagan is dead...
Brilliant! lol So is Peter, James, John and Paul. As well as ...well...you know.
If our faith in God is so feeble that it can be so easily crushed by challenges to that faith, what does that say about our faith? If someone simply says I don't believe in God and these are the reasons why is seen as a threat to Christianity.. what does that say? Can the bible stand up to critical scrutiny? Should it never be challenged even by skeptics? I look through the new testament and I see Jesus facing off with critics and putting many to shame...I saw the same thing with the Apostles they were powerful,steady,strong so convinced that people killed many of them. Since I left Cogdom I won't say I am the most religious person right now but I still believe there is a God despite all that I went through. I still think that the best explanation for the origin of complex life is a master Designer. I dont think believers in the creator should be running scared of those who challenge their faith I think if anything it should be the other way around.
Dennis keeps repeating 'ask skeptical questions,' 'competing doctrines..feel good,'faith..is belief in the absence of evidence,' etc.
This is the same line people got from Herb when reading church literature, or from his radio/TV shows. 'Don't believe me, but rather believe your bible.' However this all went out the window when people joined the church. Members were expected to blindly believe Gawds ministers. So this opened mindedness is a myth. I recall the same garbage from the left wing neo-hippies during the 1960s. When they were the underdog, they incessantly preached tolerance and seeing the other persons point of view. Now that they are the top dog, they are intolerant, banning dissenting opinions under the pretext of hate speech.
Dennis and his soul mates are not genuinely tolerant. It's only a temporary self serving mask.
So God created us imperfect. Then he condemns us for being imperfect. Also it doesn't make sense that a God of unmatched love and mercy, (as the psalmist David wrote), would send people to a hell or lake of fire to be consumed or tortured forever in horrible pain.
If there is a loving and merciful God then there is no hell because hell, or the lake of fire, is the opposite of love and mercy. A loving God wouldn't even allow a place like hell to exist!
Ed,
When you were a young schoolkid, did you have a friend who liked to focus a magnifying glass over ants in the sun, and watch them catch fire? Did you have a friend who pulled the wings off of flies?
Maybe THOSE are the attributes of God, and are the attributes that bring success in this universe. Maybe the Gnostics were right, and the Creator God is a cosmic trickster who must be overcome if we are to get free of suffering. Or maybe we can't get free of suffering, as this god-being enjoys seeing us suffer, just like your school-years friend burned up those ants.
Hell is way too much punishment for way to short a life experience on earth.
God needs to read I Corinthians 13 again
Ed, where do you get the idea that God must be loving and merciful?
God is, by definition, all-powerful. Look around you at those with the most power. Are the most powerful people the most loving and merciful?
The God of the Bible is, by his own admission, a jealous god. Look around you at the most jealous people you know. Are the most jealous people the most loving and merciful?
When you are facing torture or death at the hand of a jealous, powerful adversary, it is natural that you would say anything you could to flatter that adversary and escape his torture. Look around you. Do the truly loving and merciful people around you demand that you wear yourself out giving them praise, and threaten to burn you forever if you don't praise them enough? Or are those the traits of the psychopath and the sociopath, who insist on being flattered ad nauseam?
In short, you comments at 3:45 AM do not disprove hell. Instead, they disprove the naive notion of a loving and merciful God.
Unknown said: " I dont think believers in the creator should be running scared of those who challenge their faith I think if anything it should be the other way around."
I agree with what unknown has pointed out. What we need to recognize is that the bible is not as simple to be applied a persons life when it is torn up to be used to support right or wrong ways in life. A person can accept Jesus as Lord and Savior without a full understanding what God is revealing in the molding and shaping of human life and the whole of creation. If the bible is used to support a belief that there is no God or God is just the imagination in a persons mind those who are weak can lose faith. The bible uses the flames of fire as God's power to deal with people who are destroying those who are weak. ASB
I told a friend of mind that I didn't believe in hell and questioned how a merciful God could send anyone to hell. His response was that Gods thoughts are not our thoughts. I quess what he was saying was that Gods thinking is so far above ours that what seems to us to be the ultimate act of cruelty and evil is to God love and mercy. I let out a big sigh and changed the subject of conversation to a non-religious topic.
I find it interesting that Dennis can call out the cowardice of those who post anonymous, but when I did it months ago I was demonized.
Oh well.
By the way Dennis, the God that I worship isn't going to "punish" anyone. Sure the translators used the english word punishment but the Hebrew and Greek words both simply imply consequence. Hell fire is the consequence of rejecting God's mercy.
The God that I worship will only throw those in hell fire who totally reject him. Knowingly reject him. Those thrown in hell fire won't be weeping and gnashing their teeth because they didn't make it. No, they'll basically be flipping God off as they're thrown in.
The idea of anyone worrying about being thrown into hell fire is a manmade religious idea, used to make the masses fear.
Do I think you, Dennis, will be thrown into hell fire? No I do not, nor do I think that any who were duped by HWA and "had their conscience seared" by an idolatrous religion like the WCG, will be thrown into hell fire, unless of course that's what they finally end up choosing.
As far as asking questions. Dennis, I've read Richard Dawkins "The God Delusion" and in it he doesn't disprove God, he proves that religion is evil. That man has completely used religion to control the masses. To which I agree, and that includes Herbie and those who strive to be Herbies mini-me.
I've also read Richard Carrier, Dorothy Murdock aka Acharya S, Richard Price, Bart Ehrman, etc.
None of them are convincing in their claims. With the exception of Ehrman they claim that pagan virgin born gods were worshipped prior to Jesus, but there problem as Ehrman has pointed out, they have no archeological evidence.
They find archeological evidence that Mithra was worshipped before Jesus, but the only evidence that they have of exactly how it was worshipped is from evidence 100 years or more after Christ.
Someone writing 100 or 200 years after Christ, stating that Mithra or Vishnu or Buddha were all virgin born, dying and rising gods is not sufficient evidence. Bart Ehrman knows this.
Unfortunately people believe what they want to believe.
Kevin
#8 is the only one that makes sense...
sounds like he's trying to justify universal salvation.
"So God created us imperfect. Then he condemns us for being imperfect."
It's sad what religion has made God out to be.
No, God is not going to condemn anyone for being imperfect, that is a lie taught by othodox xianity and also taught by most Armstrong cults.
God is making man in his image after his likeness. That was only began on the day he breathed into Adam, it won't be completed until the resurrection.
How is God doing this? To borrow a phrase that I'm 99% sure that herbie stole from someone else. God can not create Holy Righteous Character from fiat.
He made us imperfect so that we can learn to hate sin. Yes, it's that simple. We allow our children to suffer a little if we think it's going to benefit them.
While the suffering on this earth is immense to us, it's nothing compared to what God has planned for us. If the bible is true that is! I believe it is.
Being created homo sapiens with the potential to eventually become the same kind of being as God, how great is that?
No, that idea didn't originate with herbie. Even the Eastern Orthodox church teaches " God became man so that man can become God". As I've said before, herbie taught absolutely nothing original.
Adam rejected God so God is allowing us (mankind) to live 7,000 years in the flesh. 6,000 years under our own rule and 1,000 years under His rule. This is how we learn to hate the results of sin.
God is staying "hands off" because this is what we've chosen. He only reaches in to this world because he is working out his plan. He reached in with Enoch, Noah, Moses, Abraham, etc, etc.
But for the most part he is allowing us to do our own thing just as our two original parents wanted.
We were made imperfect so that we can "learn through the things which we suffer".
God is not going to "punish" us for anything. Only the ones who, after being taught everything, still completely reject God's mercy will be thrown into hell. Not as punishment, but because that's what they choose.
As I've said before, the weeping and gnashing of teeth, aren't the ones being thrown into hell fire. The ones being thrown into the fire will most likely be flipping God off. The ones weeping are the ones who were called in this life and turned their back for whatever reason. They'll still be saved, but not in the first resurrection which they could have been.
I know that acog fools on here are going to bring up, well the bible says those who look back aren't fit for the Kingdom of God", to which I say, if you think that you are fit for the kingdom of God, I sure feel sorry for you. None of us are fit for the Kingdom of God!
Kevin McMillen
their problem as Ehrman
I hate auto correct
Anon. 7:05am my oh my you have a lot to learn.
John 3:16 nuff said
Kevin McMillen
I also find the idea of God resurrecting people just to cast them alive into hell fire to be repugnant and from the minds of ignorant self righteous men.
The only two that the bible says that will be cast alive are the false prophet and the beast.
Logically those who reject God will die of old age (the wages of sin is death) during the GWTJ and then their dead bodies cast into hell fire. So my comment about them flipping God off is being revisited. I don't think they'll even be alive.
Kevin
Most posters seem to like Dennis, Kev, and some of those actually value his opinions. You two are not on the same level in that way. Also, you called out a different subset of anonymous posters. Yours were the “wrong” ones. Lastly, you are of a different intellect. Not saying that’s bad per se. Humanity is an ecosystem, and each level fulfills a purpose. The broader community does tend to perceive the pecking order.
The Beast in Revelation was most likely Vespasian in the day and the False Prophet....The Apostle Paul to Jewish Christians to whom the Book was written. It was Paul the Ephesians said claimed to be an apostle but was found wanting and rejected. Even Paul lamented that ALL in Asia had forsaken him. It was these two Jewish Christians assigned the Lake of Fire to back in the day
No, I didn't call out a different subset of anonymous posters. I wanted everyone to identify themselves some way. Not necessarily with their real name, but using some kind of identifier so that we can know which anonymous we're having a conversation with.
I really don't understand why people are so afraid of being identified on this forum but I accept that some are. I've been told by three different hirelings that I'm not welcome at their meeting. So be it, I don't need them. They fear people who think for themselves.
I like Dennis too, he makes people think. I'm saddened in a way that he's thrown everything away but that's temporary. He'll be in God's Kingdom and most likely quicker than some of those who are acog organization worshippers and who fear getting caught on this forum. What does Revelation say about the fearful?
Different intellect? Hmmmmm?
Kevin
"The broader community does tend to perceive the pecking order."
Hilarious. The broader community, being this forum, doesn't really know me. I post only when I'm seeking a little entertainment. There are a handful in this "broader community" who actually think a little too highly of themselves. This I mock, but at times I post my thoughts, as above.
LOL
Kevin
Yes, God will resurrect people just to throw them into the lake of fire. The reason being that they are made in Gods image, ie, they are precious. Hence He will give them a face to face judgment. The bible doesn't say that these will be thrown ALIVE into the lake of fire. It only says that the beast and false prophet will.
The concept of hell was invented because there are a lot of bad people. The primary blame should be on the bad people not the people who invented the concept. How else will bad people stop making others suffer?
go down the rabbit hole. To enter into a situation or begin a process or journey that is particularly strange, problematic, difficult, complex, or chaotic, especially one that becomes increasingly so as it develops or unfolds. (An allusion to Alice's Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll.)
That is a good description of religious debates. And, due to increasing fake news and decreasing integrity the whole society is going that way. Soon it will be impossible for the average person to get to the bottom of anything. They just don't have the brains, the time, the objectivity, the resources, and the motivation. This is the world the usual suspects have built.
The big question is how do you assign the accountability element to “being taught”. There must be this accountability factor in order for just punishment to accrue. HWA assigned it based on whether an individual heard and believed what he had to say, and then “fell away” from the truth he allegedly taught. He made his ministry and its impact all about himself.
If there are greater future implications to human life, spiritual ones, then what is required in order to pass the physical audition must come from God. The fact that there are so many teachings and opinions indicates that humans cannot be depended upon to accurately “channel” God.
The so-called 7,000 year plan, an extra-biblical theory, is an extrapolation or inference of the creation week allegory, and not specifically spelled out anywhere in scripture. It assumes that each day of creation was a 24 hour period, when in fact the celestial bodies which cause 24 hour days were not created until the fourth day.
Kevin, semantics aside, you called out the particular anonymous posters who irritated you. Those are different anonymous posters from the anonymous posters who irritate Dennis. Of course, there are also trolls who irritate all of us, but that’s the very basis for trollhood.
Of course, nobody knows any of us. They only know what we say here. The pecking order is established by the intellectual merits of our cumulative postings. You say you come here for your amusement, and we in turn are amused by your thought processes, although I am sure that that is inadvertent on your part.
"Kevin, semantics aside, you called out the particular anonymous posters who irritated you. Those are different anonymous posters from the anonymous posters who irritate Dennis. Of course, there are also trolls who irritate all of us, but that’s the very basis for trollhood."
Wrong again. What irritated me was trying to communicate with someone but not knowing which anonymous post belonged to which anonymous poster. Which is why I simply called out the ignorance of posting anonymously if you wanted to carry out a conversation.
If they'd just pick a pseudonym and stick with it there would be no problem.
But no, people just come here and post anonymously just to be an asshole!
Kevin
""Kevin
Yes, God will resurrect people just to throw them into the lake of fire. The reason being that they are made in Gods image, ie, they are precious. Hence He will give them a face to face judgment. The bible doesn't say that these will be thrown ALIVE into the lake of fire. It only says that the beast and false prophet will.""
How does one reason with stupidity?H
In your first sentence you say that God will resurect people just to throw them into the lake of fire.
Then your next to last sentence says that the bible doesn't say they will be thrown ALIVE into the lake of fire.
Just what the hell does resurect mean to you?
Do you seriously think the judgment is a face to face, jury trial type of scenario?
Oh brother!
Anon. 10:33am.
Oh brother!
"""The so-called 7,000 year plan, an extra-biblical theory, is an extrapolation or inference of the creation week allegory, and not specifically spelled out anywhere in scripture. It assumes that each day of creation was a 24 hour period, when in fact the celestial bodies which cause 24 hour days were not created until the fourth day."""
Really? Seven days of unleavened bread, seven sabbaths of harvest, Trumpets being on the 1st day of the seventh month, seven days of tabernacles?
Believe it or not but the seven thousand year plan is more than extra-biblical and was not invented by herbie.
Kevin
It is funny that some of the harshest comments come from COG loyalists when the Bible teaches we should love our neighbor - and the example given in Luke was a Samaritan who the Jews despised for having false religious beliefs.
The Bible also teaches you should love your enemy.
I find the range of comments interesting and thought provoking.
Some of the book recommendations are useful as well.
I have started reading "Darwin's Doubt" by Steven Meyer - who believes in intelligent design, but without the 6,000 year limit. Some of the intelligent design scientists take a scientific approach and accept the fossil record. This makes more sense than the people who try to shoehorn everything into 6,000 years - including dinosaurs.
"Of course, nobody knows any of us. They only know what we say here. The pecking order is established by the intellectual merits of our cumulative postings. You say you come here for your amusement, and we in turn are amused by your thought processes, although I am sure that that is inadvertent on your part."
The amusing part is your thought (or lack thereof) process and your fear of giving your name.
If you think anonymous snide remarks show your intelligence, you are sorely mistaken.
Kevin
Let's see, there are six anonymous posts between 10:13am and 11:18am, how the hell is anyone supposed to know if they are from six different people, two different people or all from the same person?
It's hilarious how "courageous" (NOT!!!) comments are cloaked in anonymity.
Talking about "content" of posts, you are balless! And pathetic. Most likely commenting between video games in you mother's basement!
Kevin
Kevin Allen McHerb
You join Herb in rejecting rights. How dare peoples right to anonymity makes life less convenient for you. You must learn to walk the path of the narrow gate, Kevin McHerb.
You are a very funny man. Like a court jester. Keep up your comments. Ha, ha, ha, ha.
God is a personal experience. It cannot be proven to those who have not experienced it. How does one explain color to the blind or emotion to a machine? It is not an intellectual pursuit but a spiritual one.
Balless Anonymous said...
January 20, 2019 at 3:46 PM
************************
Nope, his childish ignorance isn't worth the time.
Kevin McMillen
Morgantown WV
I'm not scared!
Psychosis is a personal experience too, hearing voices, paranoia, delusions, etc.
"Adam rejected God so God is allowing us (mankind) to live 7,000 years in the flesh. 6,000 years under our own rule and 1,000 years under His rule. "
Then "God" has left out about 193,000 years of humans on the planet. I guess the 200,000 year plan of God might seem a bit too long . If there is a God then the plan actually needs be stretched out to about 13.87 billion years not including parallel Universes and Many Worlds.
Thanks all for your many comments. Hell of a job! :)
Dennis, I have to ask, were you alive 200,000 years ago? If not, just how do you know?
Your being a WCG hireling for, how many years, you should know that "anthropo" (man) existing on earth 200,000 years ago, or even a billion years ago is no problem.
So what if "anthropo" had been in existence for hundreds of thousands of years, what was to stop God from looking down 6,000 years ago and saying, "Let us make anthropo in our image after our likeness?" Then kneeling down and forming Adam, looking like the others who existed long before, but having a spirit in him that no other "anthropo" had before?
Dennis, I don't know, as you you don't know either, I wasn't there 200,000 years ago. But what I do know is that there are scientists out there who are smarter than you and I who are Christians. Dr. Mary Schweitzer being one of them. An interesting lady.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Higby_Schweitzer
I completely understand your denying God. If it wasn't for what I believe, things I learned in WCG, things from WCG that I've thrown out, and things I've learned from others, then I'd be an atheist too. I could never turn to mainstream orthodox Christianity. The god they teach is a monster, as was the god HWA taught and the god the acogs teach. Especially if they still teach a third resurrection.
Yeah, I still believe in a seven thousand year plan but I completely respect your disagreement. As I've said before, I've read Carrier, Dawson, and others. I've studied Islam a little, and Buddhism and others as time allows. I want to learn and understand for I know it will either strengthen my faith or reveal truth that I've missed.
I'm not afraid of knowledge, but I am very skeptical to change. My mind can be changed but it takes a lot of evidence.
"Psychosis is a personal experience too, hearing voices, paranoia, delusions, etc."
Why would God reveal himself to a smart-ass?
Anonymous 7:02am said:
"When in fact the celestial bodies which cause 24 hour days were not created until the fourth day."
You either weren't in the WCG or you don't know what was taught.
The teaching was/is that the celestial bodies were created billions of years ago but were in a state of "tohu" and "bohu" because of the angelic rebellion. On the fourth day God renewed, restored, refreshed the atmosphere of earth so the sun and moon could once again be seen. There is a difference between the Hebrew words for create and made.
God having created the heavens and the earth billions of years ago, but he "made" (restored, renewed) everything in six days, about 6,000 years ago according to the teaching.
That's the teaching, whether true or not I don't care to debate!
Kevin
Sorry Dawkins, auto correct must think I'm on Family Feud.
Kevin
Articles like this prove that apostates like Dennis the spiritual menace, build mental defences when rebuked. I experienced this when I attended services. If I complained to a member, they would lay low for a while, then come back stronger and more confident in their mistreatment of others. In some cases, it looked like they were 'helped' by their friends in developing counter arguments and rationalizations. Some 'friends.'
I thought that wikipedia article had stated that Mary was a Christian, but it doesn't. Here's an interview of her in 2016 that does.
http://thewell.intervarsity.org/voices/unlikely-paleontologist-interview-mary-schweitzer-part-1I
Kevin
Here is that link again.
http://thewell.intervarsity.org/voices/unlikely-paleontologist-interview-mary-schweitzer-part-1
Kevin
Hey Kevin, It’s good to see you commenting again! :-) Just wondering if there’s a way to get in touch with you privately? I’d hesitate for you to share your email on here, but if perhaps we inform Gary of our respective emails and he can then forward yours to me and mine to yours or some other way to get in touch that’d be great as I’d like to pick your brains about WCG/HWA, your experience, etc. if you’re willing?
Cheers, J
"""Jon said...
Hey Kevin, It’s good to see you commenting again! :-) Just wondering if there’s a way to get in touch with you privately? I’d hesitate for you to share your email on here, but if perhaps we inform Gary of our respective emails and he can then forward yours to me and mine to yours or some other way to get in touch that’d be great as I’d like to pick your brains about WCG/HWA, your experience, etc. if you’re willing?
Cheers, J"""
I'd be willing to bet that we have a mutual friend or two. Which state do you live in? Assuming you're in the U.S.
Kevin
Kevin Allen McMillen said...
"I'd be willing to bet that we have a mutual friend or two. Which state do you live in? Assuming you're in the U.S.”
Idk if we might or not, but I’m from the land “down under” i.e. Australia :-) I’ll probably get in touch with Gary in the next few days and if you want to do likewise then hopefully he won’t mind acting as intermediary and mailman of sorts.
Kevin: As soon as I get Jon's email address I will connect you two.
Post a Comment