Hell made up by the "church". I am 😲

[Hari Seldon]

I'll talk scripture with you any day of the week...pick a subject...

Scripture is just man made stories written a couple thousand years ago. Not much to discuss.

 

[Daisy]

Scripture is just man made stories written a couple thousand years ago. Not much to discuss.

Then you responded to my post without understanding...wanna try again?

I get it...you're unwilling to reason on the scriptures...

 

[Michael Cole]

who makes the Rules?

Authoritarians.

what do the Rules say?

Obey the authoritarian...

why not just follow the Rules?

...or else!

the Rules say that Jesus is The Way, The Truth and The Life. no man comes to The Father but by me.

That's the nature of Christ, not a rule.

yes, Jesus is Exclusive and the Only Way to God and Heaven.............those are The Rules.

So say the authoritarians.

John 10:1 KJV - "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber."​

Jesus is The Door, if you 'roll your own' you don't get in and are a Thief and a Robber.

Roll your own? Jesus the Door is commercially distributed? <<-- rhetorical question

View attachment 67506159...Cartoon man had his own way of doing things. meh, didn't work too well at the Judgement and now he realizes that he must have been Insane.

Cartoon man was Insane and also a Thief and a Robber; Jesus was the way, the truth, the life. somehow Cartoon man missed those points and walked out.

gooood nite Cartoon man.

I roll my own, and I don't talk to cartoons.

 

[Revelation]

"the soul that sinneth, it shall die." Ezekiel 18:4


He did not...he talked about destruction...

the problem with the annihilation opinion is that you can't get around what Jesus plainly taught in his message regarding the Rich man and Lazarus

you throw that away saying 'it is just a story'.

read it again, seems to be more than just a story. some say 'just a parable'; nope Jesus never said it was a parable.

then you get the verses in scripture talking about the fires of hell and Lake of Fire. meh, can't talk your way out of that either; keep trying...


Luke 16:19-31....

23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

there you go, Rich man in hell and torments.

24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

Cool my tongue for i am tormented in this flame. doesn't sound dead to me ???

25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

tormented again, no piles of dirt as you say. sorry i go with Jesus on this.

28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment


this 'place of torment'..........it is a Real Place.

People, don't let the devil and quick talking Corporate Denomination talk you out of the Plain English Understanding of what Jesus said.

and failing that, just Repent and Follow Jesus. don't mess around trying to 'win Debates'; you don't win with the Devil. the devil offers lose-lose forever.


blessings.

 

[Daisy]

Rich man and Lazarus

It's a parable...

The context and the wording of the story show clearly that it is a parable and not an actual historical account. Poverty is not being extolled, nor are riches being condemned. Rather, conduct, final rewards, and a reversal in the spiritual status, or condition, of those represented by Lazarus and by the rich man are evidently indicated. The fact that the rich man’s brothers rejected Moses and the prophets also shows that the illustration had a deeper meaning and purpose than that of contrasting poverty and the possession of riches.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002698#h=14:0-14:537

Is the account, at Luke 16:19-31, literal or merely an illustration of something else? The Jerusalem Bible, in a footnote, acknowledges that it is a “parable in story form without reference to any historical personage.” If taken literally, it would mean that those enjoying divine favor could all fit at the bosom of one man, Abraham; that the water on one’s fingertip would not be evaporated by the fire of Hades; that a mere drop of water would bring relief to one suffering there. Does that sound reasonable to you? If it were literal, it would conflict with other parts of the Bible. If the Bible were thus contradictory, would a lover of truth use it as a basis for his faith? But the Bible does not contradict itself.

What does the parable mean? The “rich man” represented the Pharisees. (See verse 14.) The beggar Lazarus represented the common Jewish people who were despised by the Pharisees but who repented and became followers of Jesus. (See Luke 18:11; John 7:49; Matthew 21:31, 32.) Their deaths were also symbolic, representing a change in circumstances. Thus, the formerly despised ones came into a position of divine favor, and the formerly seemingly favored ones were rejected by God, while being tormented by the judgment messages delivered by the ones whom they had despised.—Acts 5:33; 7:54.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101989234

 

[Hari Seldon]

Then you responded to my post without understanding...wanna try again?

Can't reason with make believe.

 

[Revelation]

It's a parable...

that is your opinion, not mine.

The context and the wording of the story show clearly that it is a parable and not an actual historical account. Poverty is not being extolled, nor are riches being condemned. Rather, conduct, final rewards, and a reversal in the spiritual status, or condition, of those represented by Lazarus and by the rich man are evidently indicated. The fact that the rich man’s brothers rejected Moses and the prophets also shows that the illustration had a deeper meaning and purpose than that of contrasting poverty and the possession of riches.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002698#h=14:0-14:537

Is the account, at Luke 16:19-31, literal or merely an illustration of something else? The Jerusalem Bible, in a footnote, acknowledges that it is a “parable in story form without reference to any historical personage.” If taken literally, it would mean that those enjoying divine favor could all fit at the bosom of one man, Abraham; that the water on one’s fingertip would not be evaporated by the fire of Hades; that a mere drop of water would bring relief to one suffering there. Does that sound reasonable to you? If it were literal, it would conflict with other parts of the Bible. If the Bible were thus contradictory, would a lover of truth use it as a basis for his faith? But the Bible does not contradict itself.

What does the parable mean? The “rich man” represented the Pharisees. (See verse 14.) The beggar Lazarus represented the common Jewish people who were despised by the Pharisees but who repented and became followers of Jesus. (See Luke 18:11; John 7:49; Matthew 21:31, 32.) Their deaths were also symbolic, representing a change in circumstances. Thus, the formerly despised ones came into a position of divine favor, and the formerly seemingly favored ones were rejected by God, while being tormented by the judgment messages delivered by the ones whom they had despised.—Acts 5:33; 7:54.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101989234

the problem i see is that you claim the Rich man and Lazarus is a Parable because i say so.

The Jerusalem Bible, in a footnote, acknowledges that it is a “parable in story form without reference to any historical personage.”

a footnote in a Study bible does not turn what Jesus said into a parable either.

Jesus spoke of the Rich Man as a real person and not a Cartoon or fable.

regardless of how you believe, Jesus said 'ye must be Born Again'.

catch the bottom line to stuff and run with it. kick the devil out of the room and go with what Jesus said.

blessings.

 

[Daisy]

Can't reason with make believe.

You sure can but not everyone is willing...

 

[Logician Man]

Hari Seldon said:
Can't reason with make believe.

You sure can

/ˈmeɪk·bəˌliv/ a state of mind in which you pretend to believe that conditions are real, esp. because that reality would be more pleasant than the actual one: Disneyland creates a world of make-believe.

MAKE BELIEVE definition | Cambridge English Dictionary​

Cambridge Dictionary
https://dictionary.cambridge.org › dictionary › make-be...

Thesaurus: synonyms, antonyms, and examples
to act as if something is true when it is not

to act as if something is true when it is not​

These words all describe behaving as if something is true when you know it is not.
A common word for this is pretend. Pretend is used when you are behaving like something is true as part of a game, or in order to deceive someone.
She pretended not to know about the surprise.

pretend​

Thesaurus > imaginary > pretend
These are words and phrases related to pretend. Click on any word or phrase to go to its thesaurus page. Or, go to the definition of pretend.

IMAGINARY​

It doesn't make sound, Mommy, it's a pretend guitar!

Synonyms and examples​

imaginary
Our daughter had an imaginary friend when she was six.
made-up
The comedian started with some obviously made-up stories about hanging out with the Queen.
make-believe
disapproving
Some politicians seem to live in a make-believe world where everything revolves around their interests.
non-existent
These accounts are used to sell fake or non-existent goods.
fantastic
Her books were filled with magicians and fantastic creatures.
fantastical
The illustrator was known for his fantastical creations.
fictional