abolishing Hell? ("all liars will have their part in the Lake of Fire...")

[FHII]

huh????

Seriously... You don't know?

 

[junobet]

It's not an unfamiliar sentiment. We have jails for people who 'break the law'. We let 'em out because we hope that they will rehabilitate, don't we? I mean, we truly hope these people recognise that what they did was unacceptable, and stop it. But we also know that many of them make the decided choice to continue on in their unlawful or dangerous behaviour. What then? We just let them go on harming people, or we put them back in jail?

[SIZE=medium]You find the principle of rehabilitation problematic? How many times did Jesus tell Peter we ought to forgive those who sinned against us? How many times do you think Christ Himself will forgive sinners before he loses hope in their possible rehabilitation? [/SIZE]

So, wanting people to come to repentance, but recognising their right to choose otherwise and the consequences of that choice, is not that confusing.

[SIZE=medium]Let me clarify that in no way do I doubt that for salvation we must acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord, fully realize the scale of our sins, repent and accept His gracious gift of forgiveness. It’s your overemphasis on free choice that I have a problem with:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]If we have to make this choice in this life, the first question is what ‘choice’ those millions and millions of people had who never even had a chance to hear the Gospel? It’s Calvin’s God who is cruel enough to create people just to make them suffer for all eternity, not the Bible’s.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]And even more importantly: is your version of God really so weak that you can put human free will above divine sovereignty? According to your doctrine it is not God who decides who will or won’t be saved. Instead we are masters of our own fate and God is forced to do our bidding. That’s why Moltmann calls it atheist at heart. The God that I believe in is irresistible;[/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium]“[/SIZE][SIZE=medium]And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself." [/SIZE][SIZE=medium](John 12:32)[/SIZE]

The 'good news' is that Jesus makes us way for us NOT to burn in hell...but it gets to be on God's terms, not ours...after all, he paid the price. The atrocities of ISIS are horrible, and unless they come to Christ, they will pay for them. Just because I want them to realize their sin, and turn to Jesus, doesn't mean I'm saying I wish they (as they are now) don't have to pay for their actions. We'd all need to pay for our actions...justly...unless for Jesus. For in Jesus, we know we have forgiveness, but we are also aware of the sin that means we need him. To dismiss our sins and what they cost, is to dismiss what Christ did on the cross for us. If sin wasn't a big deal, then neither was Christ's sacrifice. I think we cheapen what Jesus did, if we say that people get to reject him but still be covered by him. Nothing in scripture gives us leave to make the assumption that those who scoff at Jesus can get a 'free' ride. Salvation is by and through Christ alone. You accept his sacrifice on your behalf, or you reject it. Again, nothing in scripture suggests those who reject him belong to his bride....nothing.

[SIZE=medium]See above: you took the terms out of God’s hand and made it your own decision whether you are saved or not. I believe we are wholly in God’s hand.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]According to your doctrine Christ did not die on the cross to save the world, but only manages to save a tiny elite club. How is that good news and glorifying Christ? If I held such beliefs, I’d be weeping all day! How could anybody rejoice in Heaven in the knowledge that people we’ve been commanded to love are burning in hell?[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]I see nothing in scripture that gives rise to the hubris that we can choose to have faith. Faith is an undeserved gift! Nothing in our salvation is our own merit, so all of us get a free ride! (Eph. 2:8-9) And I don’t think it cheapens Christ’s sacrifice to trust that eventually He’ll give this wonderful gift to everyone, even to those whose crimes we despise most. That doesn’t mean that sins aren’t a big deal, it means that Christ is strong enough to take away the sin of the world (John 1:29)![/SIZE]

Um...yeah. That's what the bible says. Not me...scripture. When it says "the road is narrow and few find it," just after saying "the road to hell is wide and many find it"....I can't see how you can't be clear on that.

[SIZE=medium]Um … yeah, that nothing is impossible with God and that God is love is what the Bible says. Not me … scripture. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium] In the Sermon on the Mount it also says that the road to destruction is wide ([/SIZE][SIZE=medium]ἀπώλεια [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]is not the same as [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]γέεννα[/SIZE][SIZE=medium] – you may want to get an accurate translation before you make claims about what the Bible “clearly says about hell”!). And how true that is that the road to destruction is wide: Alas, I can think of very few people who may have managed to fully adhere to this Sermons teachings. Both you and I have disqualified ourselves in just a couple of posts. Thank God that the Gospel of Matthew goes on to tell us about Christ’s atoning sacrifice for sinners.[/SIZE]

The 'point' of the passage is heeded, of course it is...Christians are called to those things, without a doubt...regardless of 'where' they think a person may be headed. But you cannot use that to deny what it clearly says about hell. Or all the other passages about it. Honestly...it seems to me the only way a person can claim the bible doesn't teach about hell is because they don't want it to. You don't like the idea of hell, you think it doesn't "mesh" with an all-loving God, and so explain away or make 'meaningless' the passages that talk about it. I'm sorry, but that doesn't change the fact that they are there, and that Jesus loves us all enough to warn us about it. You don't send your kid across the road without first explaining the dangers of it. If you send them out letting them think nothing could go wrong, you could end up with a dead kid.

[SIZE=medium]It's your idea that God let’s his kids run into the street. My God both tells us about the dangers and is willing to catch us before we get hit by a car. [/SIZE]

I'm wondering if you think it's just hell that you think is over the top, too much evil for a loving God, or if you think all punishment or hardship is 'out of character' for him. I ask because the bible if full of it. Jesus lamented over Jerusalem, weeping that he had called to her, wanting to gather her under his arms in protection and love...but they refused to come to him. He knew that rejection of him would bring judgment on them...and so it did. When the Romans destroyed Jerusalem in 70AD, we have reports of some of the most dark and horrid moments for the Jews. So I'm wondering if you think God making that sort of judgement is acceptable, or if you refuse it as well?

[SIZE=medium]My Bible does not just frequently tell me about God's wrath, but it also frequently tells me that His wrath is purifying and won't last forever. See for example Micah 7:18-19 and note that it's not people but their sin that is thrown into the deepest sea:[/SIZE]



[SIZE=medium]"18 [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]Is there any God like you,[/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium] forgiving iniquity,
[/SIZE][SIZE=medium]passing over transgressions by the survivors who are your[/SIZE][SIZE=small][[/SIZE][SIZE=small]q[/SIZE][SIZE=small]][/SIZE][SIZE=medium] heritage?[/SIZE][SIZE=small][[/SIZE][SIZE=small]r[/SIZE][SIZE=small]][/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]He is not angry forever,[/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium] because he delights in gracious love.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=small]19 [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]He will again show us compassion;[/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium] he will subdue our iniquities.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium]You will hurl all their sins into the deepest sea."[/SIZE]



[SIZE=medium]So please note that I do not come up with unbiblical newfangled hippie-ideas here that are just my personal fad. [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]The doctrine of universal [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]reconciliation[/SIZE][SIZE=medium] (or [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]apokastastasis[/SIZE][SIZE=medium]) [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]is ancient and [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]was still widely held among Christians in Augustine’s time. Eastern Orthodoxy at large always stuck to it and from the 19[/SIZE][SIZE=small]th[/SIZE][SIZE=medium] century onwards most of Western Christianity has reembraced it, if not as dogmatic certainty than at least as something that we ought to hope and pray for. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium]Should you not want to take my word for this and have time and interest, here’s from a person who’s far more learned than I am: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGE3QNt0T7w[/SIZE]

Yes, but the prodigal son had to come home in repentance first, didn't he? If he had foolishly stayed in the foreign land, he would have starved to death in a pig farm. This is my point! God knows what will befall us. So he opened a door for us to come to him, to come home. But if we don't come to Jesus in repentance, we're going to starve in a foreign land.
​

[SIZE=medium]Of course I agree that everybody will have to come to repentance. The [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]difference between you and me seems to be that you think that there’s a deadline for repenting, that ends as soon as we breathed our last breath. I on the other hand believe that Christ descended into the realm of the dead to preach to them. If there is a just a single verse that supports the notion of a deadline at death, please tell me where to find it. You’ll find Jesus preaching to the dead referenced in 1 Peter 3:18-20 and 1 Peter 4:6, possibly also in Eph. 4:9. I have little doubt the dead accept His gospel, because the Bible tells me "that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Phil 2:10)
[/SIZE]

 

[ScaliaFan]

Seriously... You don't know?

I know proper English

some do not, apparently

 

[Naomi25]

[SIZE=medium]You find the principle of rehabilitation problematic? How many times did Jesus tell Peter we ought to forgive those who sinned against us? How many times do you think Christ Himself will forgive sinners before he loses hope in their possible rehabilitation? [/SIZE]


[SIZE=medium]Let me clarify that in no way do I doubt that for salvation we must acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord, fully realize the scale of our sins, repent and accept His gracious gift of forgiveness. It’s your overemphasis on free choice that I have a problem with:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]If we have to make this choice in this life, the first question is what ‘choice’ those millions and millions of people had who never even had a chance to hear the Gospel? It’s Calvin’s God who is cruel enough to create people just to make them suffer for all eternity, not the Bible’s.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]And even more importantly: is your version of God really so weak that you can put human free will above divine sovereignty? According to your doctrine it is not God who decides who will or won’t be saved. Instead we are masters of our own fate and God is forced to do our bidding. That’s why Moltmann calls it atheist at heart. The God that I believe in is irresistible;[/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium]“[/SIZE][SIZE=medium]And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself." [/SIZE][SIZE=medium](John 12:32)[/SIZE]


[SIZE=medium]See above: you took the terms out of God’s hand and made it your own decision whether you are saved or not. I believe we are wholly in God’s hand.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]According to your doctrine Christ did not die on the cross to save the world, but only manages to save a tiny elite club. How is that good news and glorifying Christ? If I held such beliefs, I’d be weeping all day! How could anybody rejoice in Heaven in the knowledge that people we’ve been commanded to love are burning in hell?[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]I see nothing in scripture that gives rise to the hubris that we can choose to have faith. Faith is an undeserved gift! Nothing in our salvation is our own merit, so all of us get a free ride! (Eph. 2:8-9) And I don’t think it cheapens Christ’s sacrifice to trust that eventually He’ll give this wonderful gift to everyone, even to those whose crimes we despise most. That doesn’t mean that sins aren’t a big deal, it means that Christ is strong enough to take away the sin of the world (John 1:29)![/SIZE]



[SIZE=medium]Um … yeah, that nothing is impossible with God and that God is love is what the Bible says. Not me … scripture. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium] In the Sermon on the Mount it also says that the road to destruction is wide ([/SIZE][SIZE=medium]ἀπώλεια [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]is not the same as [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]γέεννα[/SIZE][SIZE=medium] – you may want to get an accurate translation before you make claims about what the Bible “clearly says about hell”!). And how true that is that the road to destruction is wide: Alas, I can think of very few people who may have managed to fully adhere to this Sermons teachings. Both you and I have disqualified ourselves in just a couple of posts. Thank God that the Gospel of Matthew goes on to tell us about Christ’s atoning sacrifice for sinners.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]It's your idea that God let’s his kids run into the street. My God both tells us about the dangers and is willing to catch us before we get hit by a car. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]My Bible does not just frequently tell me about God's wrath, but it also frequently tells me that His wrath is purifying and won't last forever. See for example Micah 7:18-19 and note that it's not people but their sin that is thrown into the deepest sea:[/SIZE]



[SIZE=medium]"18 [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]Is there any God like you,[/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium] forgiving iniquity,
[/SIZE][SIZE=medium]passing over transgressions by the survivors who are your[/SIZE][SIZE=small][[/SIZE][SIZE=small]q[/SIZE][SIZE=small]][/SIZE][SIZE=medium] heritage?[/SIZE][SIZE=small][[/SIZE][SIZE=small]r[/SIZE][SIZE=small]][/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]He is not angry forever,[/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium] because he delights in gracious love.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=small]19 [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]He will again show us compassion;[/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium] he will subdue our iniquities.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium]You will hurl all their sins into the deepest sea."[/SIZE]



[SIZE=medium]So please note that I do not come up with unbiblical newfangled hippie-ideas here that are just my personal fad. [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]The doctrine of universal [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]reconciliation[/SIZE][SIZE=medium] (or [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]apokastastasis[/SIZE][SIZE=medium]) [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]is ancient and [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]was still widely held among Christians in Augustine’s time. Eastern Orthodoxy at large always stuck to it and from the 19[/SIZE][SIZE=small]th[/SIZE][SIZE=medium] century onwards most of Western Christianity has reembraced it, if not as dogmatic certainty than at least as something that we ought to hope and pray for. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium]Should you not want to take my word for this and have time and interest, here’s from a person who’s far more learned than I am: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGE3QNt0T7w[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]Of course I agree that everybody will have to come to repentance. The [/SIZE][SIZE=medium]difference between you and me seems to be that you think that there’s a deadline for repenting, that ends as soon as we breathed our last breath. I on the other hand believe that Christ descended into the realm of the dead to preach to them. If there is a just a single verse that supports the notion of a deadline at death, please tell me where to find it. You’ll find Jesus preaching to the dead referenced in 1 Peter 3:18-20 and 1 Peter 4:6, possibly also in Eph. 4:9. I have little doubt the dead accept His gospel, because the Bible tells me "that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Phil 2:10)
[/SIZE]

Okay. Wow. I give up. Clearly what I am saying is not being understood...either because of poor explanation on my part, or misunderstanding me on yours....because pretty much everything in this post that you say that I believe...I don't. You have managed to completely miss my points on all fronts! So...no point going forth! Cheers

 

[kerwin]

ScalliaFan,

what is the difference between all those places... Gehenna, etc?

not that i would accept your thoughts over the teachings of The Church, but... anyway

i always thoght they all meant about the same thing.. except that maybe one was Purgatory..

That sounds like you have faith in your church.

If I remember correctly Purgatory is a recent addition to the teachings of the Roman Catholic and a rough parallel exists in the book of 1 Enoch. I do not remember anything like it in Scripture and it is certainly not mentioned in the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus.

In the original language Hades is the parallel of the Hebrew word Sheol and it is where the souls of the dead go after death. In Jewish teachings it has two or more sections for souls of various righteous states. One of these is labeled Paradise, or the Bosom of Abraham. When Jesus uses it in his parable he calls the place the wicked rich man goes Hades [Sheol] and states Lazarus goes to the Bosom of Abraham. Both sides are separated by an impassible barrier. Both Jesus and the righteous thief went to the Paradise side on the day of their deaths. Later on Hades[Sheol] will be thrown into Gehenna.

Tartarus is only mentioned once and may just be another name for the wicked part of Hades or a entirely separate place. The OT speaks of a place called Abaddon which may be a parallel. The one passage claims that fallen angels are bound in it.

Gehenna is the lake of fire where the wicked are destroyed after suffering for ages and ages. It is also where Hades[Sheol] is destroyed. Some teach that has already occurred though I disagree.

 

[junobet]

Okay. Wow. I give up. Clearly what I am saying is not being understood...either because of poor explanation on my part, or misunderstanding me on yours....because pretty much everything in this post that you say that I believe...I don't. You have managed to completely miss my points on all fronts! So...no point going forth! Cheers

[SIZE=medium]I’m not so sure whether I misunderstood your position on hell or whether I just pointed you to some of its logical implications and inner inconsistencies, which you have not yet considered. Seeing that you don’t want to go forth with this, alas we won’t get a chance to find out. [/SIZE]


[SIZE=medium]But on a closing note please let me thank you for this conversation. Even though we may not have understood let alone convinced the other, it turned out to be a rather fruitful exercise for me personally: This may not be of any interest to you, but you could have brought an argument against one of my statements which I could only have countered by pointing you to the traditional Christian view that God is timeless. Which brought me to the humbling realization that in this point I myself am guilty of what I basically suspect you of: blindly holding a traditional view without ever really having thought it through for myself. Shame on me! So last night I tried to brush up a little on Augustine’s, Boethius’ and other Christian philosophies of time. It’s the kind of stuff that makes my little brain spin and fills me with more awe than understanding. But what awe it was! So again: thank you for giving me cause for these edifying reflections and be blessed![/SIZE]

 

[ScaliaFan]

If I remember correctly Purgatory is a recent addition to the teachings of the Roman Catholic and a rough parallel exists in the book of 1 Enoch.

This is all i read so far

All of God's wisdom cannot be put into a finite book or infallibly interpreted by mere humans, which is one reason we have a Church to interpret Scripture "thou art Peter and on this rock i will build My Church and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it" (Mt 6:18)

There are allusions to Purgatory in the Bible. There is the parable about the servant who was forgiven all by the Master (God) but who refused to forgive his fellow servant and so he was punished "until..." Mt 18:23. Of course we are warned that if we do not forgive, we will not be forgiven ourselves... so... theologians differ on this psg.. .but there is that word UNTIL... so...

then there is 1 Cor 3:13 (I think) which says that if a man's work (for the Lord) is less than acceptable (my words) he "shall be saved, yet as through fire."

etc...

 

[kerwin]

ScaliaFan,

All of God's wisdom cannot be put into a finite book or infallibly interpreted by mere humans, which is one reason we have a Church to interpret Scripture "thou art Peter and on this rock i will build My Church and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it" (Mt 6:18)

Peter received the gospel to preach and Jesus builds his church on faith like his.

God knows all there is and what I know is limited mixed with that which is not true.

God sends is Spirit that each us may learn to discern the difference between false and true. In short we are students. Thank you for 1 Corinthians 3:13.

 

[ScaliaFan]

ScaliaFan,

All of God's wisdom cannot be put into a finite book or infallibly interpreted by mere humans, which is one reason we have a Church to interpret Scripture "thou art Peter and on this rock i will build My Church and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it" (Mt 6:18)

Peter received the gospel to preach and Jesus builds his church on faith like his.

God knows all there is and what I know is limited mixed with that which is not true.

God sends is Spirit that each us may learn to discern the difference between false and true. In short we are students. Thank you for 1 Corinthians 3:13.

thank you for a friendly post.. dont always get that on-line

this may sound... uh... whatever it sounds like.. but it distrubs me that people do not have (do not avail themselves of) the Church Christ founded... b/c that is how i found Jesus and that is the only way i got to know him... the only way... B4 that, i only knew him in an academic sense... although i had converted to Him yrs ago... that was shown to be ... uh... 4 lack of a better word... insufficient.. .insufficient b/c i got into some serious sin and theconsequences were horrendous for me and loved ones... Only the Catholic Church straightened me out... Now, true, i have plenty of crosses, heavy crosses only Catholics know about.. but at least one of those crosses is not the feeling that i am not going to make it to Heaven. Jesus said few make it. (doesn't mean i WILL make it... just that i don't always FEEL.. um.. lost or whatever)

 

[kerwin]

ScaliaFan,

I am not Roman Catholic. I disagree with a number of their teachings. I found God first but lacked knowledge of him. I gained what knowledge I have by the grace of God. Beyond that I cannot explain why I took one path and others took another though perhaps it would be more clear to one that is fully mature.

I do understand the fact that few will make it since the road of grace takes a lot of effort to tread and most seek an easier path for growing in faith is trying process.

 

[ScaliaFan]

ScaliaFan,

I am not Roman Catholic. I disagree with a number of their teachings. I found God first but lacked knowledge of him. I gained what knowledge I have by the grace of God. Beyond that I cannot explain why I took one path and others took another though perhaps it would be more clear to one that is fully mature.

I do understand the fact that few will make it since the road of grace takes a lot of effort to tread and most seek an easier path for growing in faith is trying process.

the reason people do not make it (one of the primary ones anyway) is that they reject Christ's ONE Church... sorry, but that is the truth.. I have been in the Church, i have been out. I am one of the few who knows both... and i only say what i say in order to help others find Jesus, in the way He wants... not as they want

 

[kerwin]

ScaliaFan,

There is no evidence, except hearsay, that the state religion of the Roman empire is connected to the church at Jerusalem that was the heart of the early church. I am of the opinion that one of the the Jewish Christian churches whose leaders were not invited to the Council of Nicea was the one true church but like the claim you made I lack evidence to support the claim.

 

[ScaliaFan]

ScaliaFan,

There is no evidence, except hearsay, that the state religion of the Roman empire is connected to the church at Jerusalem that was the heart of the early church. I am of the opinion that one of the the Jewish Christian churches whose leaders were not invited to the Council of Nicea was the one true church but like the claim you made I lack evidence to support the claim.

I have studied this rather in depth. The CAtholic Church (named Roman after the city of Rome, not the Roman empire) is the Church Christ founded... I also have learned from my spiritual experiences how true Catholicism is..

Someone who has studied REALLY in depth is Scott Hahn, once the most virulent anticatholic you could find.. hated the Roman CatholicChurch.. He set out to prove the Catholic Church wrong... studied just about every book ever written on history and languages, etc... now a professor @ Catholic college in Steubenville, OH... teaching Catholicism (and related topics)

He did the math so you dont have to :)

 

[kerwin]

ScalliaFan,

As far as I know there is a great lack of evidence for the first few centuries following the birth of Christ. There are some manuscript fragments and Jerusalem was destroyed in the first century so the central authority of the church would have had to move. The evidence is that Peter, who the Catholic Church holds as the first Pope moved around. Scripture makes it appear that James had more authority than Peter; possibly because of his relationship to Jesus. The Catholic Church denies that relationship.

Note: I am referring to the modern RCC as the Catholic Church when it reality there is a number of Catholic Churches; several of which the RCC has good relationships with. In addition the pre-modern RCC was still a Catholic Church.

 

[ScaliaFan]

apparently most politicians don't believe in Hell either

or think they will escape after all their lying and corruption.. ha ha... good luck w/ that one

 

[mjrhealth]

) is the Church Christ founded.

No its the church the "catholics" founded just as teh JW;s have theirs and teh protestant theirs, all from teh same mold.

 

[ScaliaFan]

ScalliaFan,

As far as I know there is a great lack of evidence for the first few centuries following the birth of Christ. There are some manuscript fragments and Jerusalem was destroyed in the first century so the central authority of the church would have had to move. The evidence is that Peter, who the Catholic Church holds as the first Pope moved around. Scripture makes it appear that James had more authority than Peter; possibly because of his relationship to Jesus. The Catholic Church denies that relationship.

if u were to go by just the Bible (which i do not) you would have to choose Peter as leader of the 11 others. He was usually or always listed first.. and Jesus said things to him he didn't say to the others... "Thou art Peter and on this rock i will build My Church"... He askd Peter 3 times if he loved him... and then said Feed my sheep

he didn't say that and lots of other things to the others... Of course, Catholics have Tradition that has been handed down through the centuries, to assist us in interpreting the Bible and etc... If all i had were the Bible (I have read the whole Bible while outside the Church... meaning not just listening to people @ Mass read it...) and i have to tell ya... i would NOT be a Christian if all i had was the Bible.. There are many things in the Old Testament that...

one word comes to mind: Yuck

 

[kerwin]

ScalliaFan,

All of what you say may hint at Peter being the one Jesus loved "most" but being hints they are not a convincing argument.

In the scroll of Acts it is James, Jesus' brother, that acts as Paul's leader by giving him advice, not Peter. In both Acts and his letters Paul treats Peter as an equal and a dear friend not as a leader.

The evidence that the church leadership was of twelve co-equal apostles. James would in that case serve as chairman at the time Paul came to Jerusalem but Peter served as the spokesman on Pentecost.

Jesus actually stated that his people were not to be ruled over like the Gentiles though that is most likely a reference to the fact leaders are to serve the community of believers. Jesus symbolized this idea by washing the feet of the twelve.

Note: The RCC hierarchy structure seems to be similar though more rigid than the Jewish one of Jesus' time with the Pope being the equivalent of the High Priest and the College of Cardinals the equivalent to the Sanhedrin. It also has some similarity to the Roman Senate which theoretically elected the Emperor in conjunction with popular assemblies though the Jews may have something similar with their high priest.

 

[ScaliaFan]

ScalliaFan,

All of what you say may hint at Peter being the one Jesus loved "most" but being hints they are not a convincing argument.

In the scroll of Acts it is James, Jesus' brother, that acts as Paul's leader by giving him advice, not Peter. In both Acts and his letters Paul treats Peter as an equal and a dear friend not as a leader.

The evidence that the church leadership was of twelve co-equal apostles. James would in that case serve as chairman at the time Paul came to Jerusalem but Peter served as the spokesman on Pentecost.

Jesus actually stated that his people were not to be ruled over like the Gentiles though that is most likely a reference to the fact leaders are to serve the community of believers. Jesus symbolized this idea by washing the feet of the twelve.

Note: The RCC hierarchy structure seems to be similar though more rigid than the Jewish one of Jesus' time with the Pope being the equivalent of the High Priest and the College of Cardinals the equivalent to the Sanhedrin. It also has some similarity to the Roman Senate which theoretically elected the Emperor in conjunction with popular assemblies though the Jews may have something similar with their high priest.

um... i don't fully get some of this

but will address what i get.. Jesus changed things.. At on3e time the Jews were God's chosen people.. Jesus made the Christians the chosen people, as it were... And the Church He founded is the Catholic Church based in Rome.

i will likely never convince u of that, so i suggest reading books by Scott Hahn and others..

 

[kerwin]

ScaliaFan,

All Jesus did was usher in a new covenant.

The Jews are still God's chosen people but the Gentile believers were added through Christ. The Jewish unbelievers were removed.

Paul uses a vine as an example and speaks of branches that cut off and others that are grafted.

It is all one religion but the Jews that reject Jesus follow a path of heresy.

That is why the teaching about Hell in Scripture is actually a Jewish teaching.