Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Integral to the conversation is the Jewish perception of Satan. The Jews don’t believe Satan is a fallen angel. They believe that Satan is an angel who works for God whose job it is to test us; to tempt us.And yet they did believe that there would be a reward and punishment at death. The rest is semantics.There is no basis to believe that Jesus' contemporaries believed in hell. None. Not a single one. Jesus was Jewish. Sheol in the jewish tradition is a place of non-existence outside of God's presence, and predates Christianity by centuries.But not the only one. And given the weight of all of them, it’s pretty clear early Christians did not believe as you say. Being canonical or not is irrelevant.The sources are what they are; representative of early Christian beliefs. They are not authoritative of what hell actually is.
Early Christians did not believe as you said they did.
You can always provide your non-authoritative sources. Because my sources are from early Christians who were discussing their beliefs about hell.
No your source specifically says their writings "are neither canonical nor authoritative". I already referred you to the Apocalypse of Peter which is believed to have been written before all your source's non-authoritative sources except perhaps one.
c. 100-125 B.C. "The Apocalypse of Peter is the earliest Christian reference to the afterlife, describing in vivid detail the paradise of Heaven and the torments of Hell. The work is quite early, for it was referenced by Clement and likely used by the author of the Apocalypse of Paul; It may even predate the canonical Apocalypse (Revelation) of John. The book was included in the Muratorian Canon (c.200 C.E.) as well as the Codex Claramontanus. It is difficult to speculate why it fell out of favor in the orthodox church, except perhaps that it was often associated with the heretical Gospel of Peter. " The Apocalypse Of Peter
You keep saying that they are not authoritative like we shouldn’t weigh them. As near as I can tell your only measure for authoritative is canonical which means nothing.
No it isn't semantics as they believed the punishment was to not be in God's presence which is far cry different than and eternity of being conscious and tortured in fire and brimstone for all of eternity.
It all depends if you believe spirit really did create the material world.'reward and punishment at death' is simply the expression of the fundamental illusion of man: the illusion of not being dead once we already are. Theologians will establish much of their power on this illusion.
Eternal punishment is rare; one would truly have to do severe damage to their soul to accomplish such.And yet they did believe that there would be a reward and punishment at death. The rest is semantics.There is no basis to believe that Jesus' contemporaries believed in hell. None. Not a single one. Jesus was Jewish. Sheol in the jewish tradition is a place of non-existence outside of God's presence, and predates Christianity by centuries.But not the only one. And given the weight of all of them, it’s pretty clear early Christians did not believe as you say. Being canonical or not is irrelevant.The sources are what they are; representative of early Christian beliefs. They are not authoritative of what hell actually is.Your own source says its sources are not authoritative
Early Christians did not believe as you said they did.
You can always provide your non-authoritative sources. Because my sources are from early Christians who were discussing their beliefs about hell.
No your source specifically says their writings "are neither canonical nor authoritative". I already referred you to the Apocalypse of Peter which is believed to have been written before all your source's non-authoritative sources except perhaps one.
c. 100-125 B.C. "The Apocalypse of Peter is the earliest Christian reference to the afterlife, describing in vivid detail the paradise of Heaven and the torments of Hell. The work is quite early, for it was referenced by Clement and likely used by the author of the Apocalypse of Paul; It may even predate the canonical Apocalypse (Revelation) of John. The book was included in the Muratorian Canon (c.200 C.E.) as well as the Codex Claramontanus. It is difficult to speculate why it fell out of favor in the orthodox church, except perhaps that it was often associated with the heretical Gospel of Peter. " The Apocalypse Of Peter
You keep saying that they are not authoritative like we shouldn’t weigh them. As near as I can tell your only measure for authoritative is canonical which means nothing.
Being separated from God, eternal or otherwise, is punishment.Eternal punishment is rare; one would truly have to do severe damage to their soul to accomplish such.And yet they did believe that there would be a reward and punishment at death. The rest is semantics.There is no basis to believe that Jesus' contemporaries believed in hell. None. Not a single one. Jesus was Jewish. Sheol in the jewish tradition is a place of non-existence outside of God's presence, and predates Christianity by centuries.But not the only one. And given the weight of all of them, it’s pretty clear early Christians did not believe as you say. Being canonical or not is irrelevant.The sources are what they are; representative of early Christian beliefs. They are not authoritative of what hell actually is.
Early Christians did not believe as you said they did.
You can always provide your non-authoritative sources. Because my sources are from early Christians who were discussing their beliefs about hell.
No your source specifically says their writings "are neither canonical nor authoritative". I already referred you to the Apocalypse of Peter which is believed to have been written before all your source's non-authoritative sources except perhaps one.
c. 100-125 B.C. "The Apocalypse of Peter is the earliest Christian reference to the afterlife, describing in vivid detail the paradise of Heaven and the torments of Hell. The work is quite early, for it was referenced by Clement and likely used by the author of the Apocalypse of Paul; It may even predate the canonical Apocalypse (Revelation) of John. The book was included in the Muratorian Canon (c.200 C.E.) as well as the Codex Claramontanus. It is difficult to speculate why it fell out of favor in the orthodox church, except perhaps that it was often associated with the heretical Gospel of Peter. " The Apocalypse Of Peter
You keep saying that they are not authoritative like we shouldn’t weigh them. As near as I can tell your only measure for authoritative is canonical which means nothing.
Hitler’s neshamah probably dissipated upon his demise.
Christian hell is a redo of HADES----it's not all that new
True, but the condemnation and false guilt are not.
Regards
DL
false guilt-------sheeeeesh-----do not torment yourself, my son---
all the boys do it
"Christians" didn't invent these. The imagery of "heaven" and "hell" are part of human commonality; they are everywhere in time and space throughout the ages that we know anything about.
All these images must be taken as simply the inherent, 'hard-wired' human mind. It has been called collective unconscious. If that isn't programming, it certainly resembles it.
Of course, there is nothing to prove, in any sense that even a majority would accept, that the Christian version is wrong.
It’s more complicated of a subject than you can handle. Which is why you asked it in such a amazingly stupid fashion.When did Christianity invent hell and god’s imaginary condemnation of man?
I have read where god cursed the ground, Gen 3;17, cursed is the ground for thy sake. Nowhere do I see where god condemned or cursed mankind directly.
When and why did Christianity invent the notions and lies surrounding hell and man’s condemnation?
Was it to loosen our purse strings or just to use fear as a tool of social manipulation and control?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF6I5VSZVqc
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x296qzz
Why do the gullible still believe this obvious lie?
Regards
DL
Not really. Hell first appeared in the Christianity in the Apocalypse of Peter written in the second century that largely mirrored imagery used by Homer, Plato and the like based on Jesus' reference to the site where garbage was burned. Early Christians believed as the Jehovah Witnesses do today--hell does not exist. The unworthy just cease to exist.
Personally I don’t go beyond heaven is being eternally united with God and hell is being eternally separated from God.
The OP on the other hand is on a mission to subordinate Christianity.
And yet they did believe that there would be a reward and punishment at death. The rest is semantics.There is no basis to believe that Jesus' contemporaries believed in hell. None. Not a single one. Jesus was Jewish. Sheol in the jewish tradition is a place of non-existence outside of God's presence, and predates Christianity by centuries.But not the only one. And given the weight of all of them, it’s pretty clear early Christians did not believe as you say. Being canonical or not is irrelevant.No your source specifically says their writings "are neither canonical nor authoritative". I already referred you to the Apocalypse of Peter which is believed to have been written before all your source's non-authoritative sources except perhaps one.
c. 100-125 B.C. "The Apocalypse of Peter is the earliest Christian reference to the afterlife, describing in vivid detail the paradise of Heaven and the torments of Hell. The work is quite early, for it was referenced by Clement and likely used by the author of the Apocalypse of Paul; It may even predate the canonical Apocalypse (Revelation) of John. The book was included in the Muratorian Canon (c.200 C.E.) as well as the Codex Claramontanus. It is difficult to speculate why it fell out of favor in the orthodox church, except perhaps that it was often associated with the heretical Gospel of Peter. " The Apocalypse Of Peter
You keep saying that they are not authoritative like we shouldn’t weigh them. As near as I can tell your only measure for authoritative is canonical which means nothing.
But it is torture to exist when God removes his spirit from us.
Is a God who allows people to be evil evil?The OP on the other hand is on a mission to subordinate Christianity.
True, as I dislike that supposedly moral people will idol worship a genocidal son murdering prick of a god while saying he is good.
You call evil good and that is not good.
Regards
DL
Is a God who allows people to be evil evil?The OP on the other hand is on a mission to subordinate Christianity.
True, as I dislike that supposedly moral people will idol worship a genocidal son murdering prick of a god while saying he is good.
You call evil good and that is not good.
Regards
DL
Should God intervene or allow evil to continue?
That's going to be pretty hard for HER to do. Pardon the pun.Christian hell is a redo of HADES----it's not all that new
True, but the condemnation and false guilt are not.
Regards
DL
false guilt-------sheeeeesh-----do not torment yourself, my son---
all the boys do it
If all you can think of is your dick and not the issue then ----
Regards
DL
Actually it has more to do with becoming satisfied. It's all explained in the bible. The cycle has been going on for over 6000 years."Christians" didn't invent these. The imagery of "heaven" and "hell" are part of human commonality; they are everywhere in time and space throughout the ages that we know anything about.
All these images must be taken as simply the inherent, 'hard-wired' human mind. It has been called collective unconscious. If that isn't programming, it certainly resembles it.
Of course, there is nothing to prove, in any sense that even a majority would accept, that the Christian version is wrong.
Insightful.
I think history and the fact that the majority of so called believers do not go to church even once a year is proof that most who claim a religious affiliation to Christianity are either lying of do not believe their own immoral ideology.
I thank all the gods for that because it shows that they are more moral than their ideology.
Not to mention that Christianity is hemorrhaging from the lack of adherents and good apologists.
Regards
DL
Only if you are willing to ignore the vast majority of good that has come from religion. You don't have a very balanced picture.It’s more complicated of a subject than you can handle. Which is why you asked it in such a amazingly stupid fashion.When did Christianity invent hell and god’s imaginary condemnation of man?
I have read where god cursed the ground, Gen 3;17, cursed is the ground for thy sake. Nowhere do I see where god condemned or cursed mankind directly.
When and why did Christianity invent the notions and lies surrounding hell and man’s condemnation?
Was it to loosen our purse strings or just to use fear as a tool of social manipulation and control?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF6I5VSZVqc
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x296qzz
Why do the gullible still believe this obvious lie?
Regards
DL
Not really. Hell first appeared in the Christianity in the Apocalypse of Peter written in the second century that largely mirrored imagery used by Homer, Plato and the like based on Jesus' reference to the site where garbage was burned. Early Christians believed as the Jehovah Witnesses do today--hell does not exist. The unworthy just cease to exist.
This goes to show that Christians today love to hate and seek revenge against all non-believers more than they did in the past, where they thought that no god would be such a prick as to torture people purposelessly before killing them.
Christians were more civilized in the past than they are now and we call the ancient barbaric. God some men arte stupid.
Regards
DL
I don't see how it contradicts my belief that heaven is being eternally united with God and hell is being eternally separated from God. It's just my belief. In my belief of the nature of heaven and hell, I don't go beyond God or the absence of God. I keep it simple because I don't know what it is like outside of space and time.Personally I don’t go beyond heaven is being eternally united with God and hell is being eternally separated from God.
Yet your bible says that god is Omni-present. You contradict you own dogma.
If that attribute is a lie, tell us what other attributes given to god are lies.
Regards
DL
It's nice that you own it. Your view is not a balanced one. It's super easy to defeat.The OP on the other hand is on a mission to subordinate Christianity.
True, as I dislike that supposedly moral people will idol worship a genocidal son murdering prick of a god while saying he is good.
You call evil good and that is not good.
Regards
DL
Only from extrapolating from when he gave me a full measure of his spirit.And yet they did believe that there would be a reward and punishment at death. The rest is semantics.There is no basis to believe that Jesus' contemporaries believed in hell. None. Not a single one. Jesus was Jewish. Sheol in the jewish tradition is a place of non-existence outside of God's presence, and predates Christianity by centuries.But not the only one. And given the weight of all of them, it’s pretty clear early Christians did not believe as you say. Being canonical or not is irrelevant.
You keep saying that they are not authoritative like we shouldn’t weigh them. As near as I can tell your only measure for authoritative is canonical which means nothing.
But it is torture to exist when God removes his spirit from us.
"But it is torture to exist when God removes his spirit from us."
You would know this as a fact for sure. I hope your torture stops some day.
Regards
DL
New Judaism = Secular HumanismIs a God who allows people to be evil evil?The OP on the other hand is on a mission to subordinate Christianity.
True, as I dislike that supposedly moral people will idol worship a genocidal son murdering prick of a god while saying he is good.
You call evil good and that is not good.
Regards
DL
Should God intervene or allow evil to continue?
Maybe he should give them blood to drink?
Oh! Wait a minute!
Nevermind.
