Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And the point is that you equate "judgement" with eternal punishment for no good reason, and you refuse to see that vengeance is not "justice," or that reconciliation is possible after death: you can't use that to control people very well.
You may not put any weight on what the apostles who were chosen by Jesus have to say about the matter, but I do.
Matthew records Jesus as saying that there will be those who go into eternal life and there will be those who go into eternal punishment.
Matthew 25:41 "Then He will also say to those on His left, 'Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels; . . . 46] "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
Paul states that there will be those who pay the penalty of eternal destruction away from the presence of the Lord.
2 Thessalonians 1:6 For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 7] and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, 8] dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9] These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power,
You either believe God's appointed apostles or you don't. I do.
No Such Thing as Fallen Angels with the exception being that of human messengers' such as yourself.
Once again, you give an completely unsupported assertion for which you expect people to simply take your word. The Bible speaks of fallen angels. Why should anyone believe you over the Biblical writers?
Once again, you give an completely unsupported assertion for which you expect people to simply take your word. The Bible speaks of fallen angels. Why should anyone believe you over the Biblical writers?
This is no longer the dark ages of devils and demons.
Once again, you give an completely unsupported assertion for which you expect people to simply take your word. The Bible speaks of fallen angels. Why should anyone believe you over the Biblical writers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerwade
This is no longer the dark ages of devils and demons.
If that's your idea of an intelligent argument, then you don't have any argument at all. If angels, both fallen or elect, exist, then they exist independently of the centuries of human history. If there is a supernatural realm of existence, its existence is not dependent upon what century we live in and our supposed age of enlightenment. Reality is more than we know, and more than we can experience with our human senses.
If the apostles were appointed by God to reveal His word after Jesus had returned to heaven, then their words are divine revelation regarding that realm of existence beyond what we normally experience.
No, you do not. The NT books which comprise the canon do so because their divine authority was recognized by the early Christians. It's not an either/or situation. Just as the apostles themselves had the delegated authority of Jesus, having been chosen by Him to spread His word, so also the writings of the apostles have the delegated authority of Jesus. As Paul wrote, what the apostles taught is not the word of men, but the word of God (1 Thessalonian 2:13). That applies both to what they taught orally, and what they taught in writing.
By rejecting the authority of the Bible, it is you who are actually denying the Holy Spirit who led the apostles to all the truth, with one of the results being the New Testament.
As I've pointed out elsewhere, the book of Revelation expressly states that it is a Revelation from God (the Father) to Jesus who then communicated it to John. And you don't believe that. You have your opinion, but your opinion is not that of orthodox Christianity for which you apparently have little regard.
The Constitution is to the Supreme Court as the Bible is to the Catholic Church.
Without a on-going AUTHORIZED interpreter, you have chaos and as many opinions to the meanings of the text as there are people.
The Constitution is to the Supreme Court as the Bible is to the Catholic Church.
Without a on-going AUTHORIZED interpreter, you have chaos and as many opinions to the meanings of the text as there are people.
By Catholic Church I assume you mean the Roman Catholic Church as opposed to catholic in the sense of universal church which existed long before Roman Catholicism gained ascendancy. The Bible was not written by the Roman Catholic Church. It, with regard to the New Testament was written by the apostles of Jesus and by men closely associated with the apostles. But even the Old Testament speaks of a supernatural realm of existence as does the New Testament.
People like Jerwade don't care about what the text says or means. They simply deny the existence of angels because they adopt a post-modern enlightenment view which doesn't allow for the existence of the supernatural. Belief in the supernatural has no place in post-modern rationalistic thought.
No Such Thing as Fallen Angels with the exception being that of human messengers' such as yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
Once again, you give an completely unsupported assertion for which you expect people to simply take your word. The Bible speaks of fallen angels. Why should anyone believe you over the Biblical writers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerwade
This is no longer the dark ages of devils and demons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
If that's your idea of an intelligent argument, then you don't have any argument at all. If angels, both fallen or elect, exist, then they exist independently of the centuries of human history. If there is a supernatural realm of existence, its existence is not dependent upon what century we live in and our supposed age of enlightenment. Reality is more than we know, and more than we can experience with our human senses.
If the apostles were appointed by God to reveal His word after Jesus had returned to heaven, then their words are divine revelation regarding that realm of existence beyond what we normally experience.
If you want to work out your own salvation with fear and trembling have at it.
And no intelligent argument or discussion is going to change your mind.
By Catholic Church I assume you mean the Roman Catholic Church as opposed to catholic in the sense of universal church which existed long before Roman Catholicism gained ascendancy. The Bible was not written by the Roman Catholic Church. It, with regard to the New Testament was written by the apostles of Jesus and by men closely associated with the apostles. But even the Old Testament speaks of a supernatural realm of existence as does the New Testament.
People like Jerwade don't care about what the text says or means. They simply deny the existence of angels because they adopt a post-modern enlightenment view which doesn't allow for the existence of the supernatural. Belief in the supernatural has no place in post-modern rationalistic thought.
No one said that the Catholic Church wrote the Bible, but they did assemble it and decide what would be in it. And only the Catholic Church had the Authority to do so. Authority then, Authority now.
No one said that the Catholic Church wrote the Bible, but they did assemble it and decide what would be in it. And only the Catholic Church had the Authority to do so. Authority then, Authority now.
Actually, while it is true that all 27 NT books weren't assembled together under one cover until later, sometime during the 2nd century, and again this was long before the Roman Catholic Church gained power, certain books of the New Testament, such as the four Gospels, and at least some of Paul's letters were probably traveling together as one corpus or collection of books.
The church as a whole, not the Roman Catholic Church, recognized the canonicity of the books that comprise the NT canon. And all any church council did was to formally endorse the NT books which had long since been accepted by the church at large. As early as the mid 2nd century AD, the vast majority of the New Testament books were already recognized as authoritative whether they were under one cover or not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
