Latest activity

Say it aint so · 2025-12-10T20:27:13-0600

FAITH-IN-HIM · 2025-12-10T20:24:28-0600

ThatRobGuy said:
That's where things like polling data, stats, and overall outcomes need to be given the proper weight in discussions instead of just anecdotes.

Personal anecdotes can be used to amplify or downplay themes and narratives.

I've personally been to East Cleveland easily hundreds of times, and haven't been shot while I was there. That doesn't negate the reality that there's a problem of gun violence in East Cleveland that's way higher than out in the burbs. (People who have been, or have a relative who has been would probably have a much stronger narrative in the opposite direction)

Polling & aggregated statistics would indicate that there are some problems that are largely unique to Islam, as well as other problems that while aren't unique to Islam, exist to a much higher degree in Islam. That trumps individual anecdotes (going in either direction)

"I lived in an Islam-majority country, and never had any problems...therefore, all of the complaints are just hype" is reminiscent of "My grandpa smoked 2 packs a day, and lived to be 82 and never got cancer...therefore, all of the anti-smoking stuff is just hype"

I won't share polling data or personal anecdotes; I'll share the actual statistics I posted in #68.

In USA there are 300 Full time Islamic school. compare to

Bangladesh-91% population Muslim vs 0.30% Christian. yet Bangladesh has over 1500 Christians schools and colleges.

Pakistan: 96% Muslims and 1.6% Christian. Pakistan is known as the country of Islamic extremist. yet Pakistan has over 450 Christians schools and colleges.

Malaysia : 64% Muslim vs 9% Christian , yet Malaysia has over 400 Christians schools and colleges.
Similar story in other country.

These statistics are consistent with my four decades of volunteer experience at Christian schools and hospitals in Bangladesh, Pakistan, and other Muslim-majority countries. Furthermore, I believe that approximately half of the Christians participating in this forum belong to churches that support American missionaries, doctors, and educators who serve in many of these schools and hospitals.

The argument that Muslims are inherently intolerant and, therefore, should not be given opportunities in America is not supported by either my personal experience or by the factual evidence on the ground. My observations, drawn from years of involvement in Christian educational and medical institutions across Muslim-majority countries, directly contradict this narrative. The statistics I have shared further demonstrate that, despite being in the minority, Christian communities in countries such as Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Malaysia have established and operated hundreds of schools and colleges.

It appears that a country guaranteeing religious freedom in its constitution faces more challenges opening Muslim schools in Alabama than Christian schools do in Muslim-majority Dhaka, Bangladesh.

johansen · 2025-12-10T20:22:18-0600

concretecamper said:
People become Christian through the Sacrament of Baptism

you need to define these terms better so people don't ague about it.

what is baptism to you? is it a cerimony performed in a church? is it only in a catholic church? do you have to have full immersion? does the pastor have to say all the words correctly? what if he forgets to say one of them?

or do you mean people become christian by being born again? (baptism of the heart through the transformation power of the Holy Spirit)

these are all things people have pedantically argued about on this forum and many others and it divides many denominations.

johansen · 2025-12-10T20:19:57-0600

narnia59 said:
So your view would be that all children are saved until the time when they can make a conscious decision to be saved or not? Did I understand that correctly?

children are not saved until they are born again, and from a more stringent position that some on this forum have argued about:
no one is saved until after they are ressurected, so, no one has been saved yet.

so with regard to children who have no knowledge of their own sin, (which is like 1 year of age) they, under the law or the rules, do not become guilty of sin until they become aware they have sinned.

children who die are more likely to accept Jesus' offer of forgiveness after they die than adults are, who intentionally sinned, hardened their heart, and refused to acknowledge Jesus.

so yes, technically i believe salvation for the innocent after death. but we need to define these terms better.

many Christians believe they are saved, but are not born again and do not understand the internal regeneration available to them through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. they, like my mom for decades of her life, pray to jesus for forgiveness of sin, they feel at peace.. and thats it. their relationship goes no further. i presume they will be "saved" and end up in heaven.

prodromos · 2025-12-10T20:11:55-0600

jonojim1337 said:
We use exactly the same footage to claim it is flat.

Well that's a huge fail on your part. It clearly shows the horizon is not flat.

jonojim1337 said:
But the Chinese spacewalk - although it’s probably fake - is supposedly much higher.

It's genuine, and it falsifies your claims

prodromos · 2025-12-10T20:08:42-0600

jonojim1337 said:
Hard to get a high res photo anyway. Find me something credible where you can see the rest of the moon and maybe I’ll change my mind. Just kidding I won’t.

You admit that your involvement in this thread is a complete waste of time.

jonojim1337 said:
Something’s wong.

Login to view embedded media

I held a straight edge to the horizon and it curves down at the edges. It probably doesn't curve much because the barrel distortion of the lens has straightened straightened it.

BCP1928 · 2025-12-10T20:02:28-0600

stevevw said:
And I explained this several times. I did not begin with the physical sciences. It was more philosophical about how the orthodoxy was flawed. Thats a epistemic issue of philosophy of science and not physical science.

It just occurred to me after all this time we have spent talking about ancient esoteric knowledge and stonecutting--to put the two concepts together. And what tradisition combines ancient esoteric knowledge and stonecutting? Freemasonry! You need to look into Freemasonry to find your answer.

Yarddog · 2025-12-10T20:01:41-0600

Ivan Hlavanda said:
Please don't give me AI responses

Why not. It is the same as what you would find in a book. Sarah and Hagar are allegories, according to Paul. It's scripture.

sjastro · 2025-12-10T20:00:28-0600

stevevw said:
View attachment 374292

The snake shape is melted into the stone. See those little scoop marks. They are man made and not from grinding. See the glaze this is all over the indent showing the stone was softened and melted to create this into the stone.

Let's look at your snake image, if the rock has been reduced to a melted paste why not shape the snake in a single scoop instead of segmented scoops?
The reason is quite simple, this is a relief cut where a series of overlapping holes were drilled which were then chiselled out and gives the segmented appearance. This was explained to you but alas due to cognitive dissonance it didn't register.

As an AI exercise I asked it how it was produced.

This photo shows a series of round, shallow holes forming a vertical line in a stone block, with a larger cavity or notch at the top. This type of feature is commonly found on ancient or historical stonework — and it is not a natural formation but the result of stone quarrying or shaping techniques.

Likely Identification

This is most likely an example of feather and wedge or plug and feather holes — a method of stone splitting.

How It Was Produced

Drilling: A line of small, evenly spaced round holes was drilled into the stone using a hand chisel, iron drill, or later, percussion drill.

Each hole was typically 2–4 cm in diameter and spaced 3–6 cm apart.

Inserting Tools: Into each hole, two metal shims ("feathers") and a wedge ("plug") were inserted.

Splitting: Workers hammered the wedges in sequence, applying even pressure until the stone split cleanly along the drilled line.

The top cavity visible in your image may be where a lifting clamp or pry point was used after the split, or where erosion has enlarged the uppermost drill hole.

Typical Contexts

Such features can be seen in:

Quarries (unfinished blocks or extraction faces)

Ancient monuments or construction sites

Abandoned stone blocks where the cut was never completed

Geological Note

The stone in your image appears to be volcanic tuff, limestone, or a similar soft rock, consistent with materials quarried and dressed in ancient Mediterranean or Andean contexts.

If you’d like, I can narrow down which site or culture this resembles most (e.g., Roman, Inca, Egyptian) — would you like me to do that?

The difference in my response to AI is I based it on the Egyptian method of drilled overlapping holes whereas for AI the holes are not overlapped but the manufacturing principles are similar.
Even if AI is a dumb language model why is there no reference to stone softening and scooping, since you rather disingenuously try to portray this as established science it should have fallen within the range of an AI response.

zoidar · 2025-12-10T19:59:42-0600

Dikaioumenoi said:
... The grammar itself provides it. They hear and learn because God has made them such. He has rendered them "God-taught."

Ok, but that is still not answering why He rendered them "God taught". For an example, was it because they were humble?

NxNW · 2025-12-10T19:58:02-0600

HARK! said:
Aside from the fact that the price has been artificially suppressed, I don't know how in the world you came to that conclusion, even prima facie.

Let's see your source on that. I'd be glad to debunk it for you.

I was hoping you'd say that! Behold:

Listed by decade and totals at the bottom. While the average just edges out inflation due to the outlier of the 1970s, the median (a better indicator) shows that Gold lagged inflation. It also had a fraction of the returns of both the S&P 500 and small caps.

jonojim1337 · 2025-12-10T19:56:51-0600

prodromos said:
Login to view embedded media This is a short video from a balloon at 121,000ft, from just before the balloon burst. As the camera is falling and the horizon goes from one side of the centre to the other, you can see the effect of the fishey lens distortion, bending the horizon up and down, but if you pause the video and step through one frame at a time, you can find frames where the horizon passes through the centre and is not being distorted. You can see for yourself that the horizon is not flat. No doubt you will call bollocks on what your own eyes can see.

We use exactly the same footage to claim it is flat.

But the Chinese spacewalk - although it’s probably fake - is supposedly much higher.

CLEEB · 2025-12-10T19:52:19-0600

Paulwat said:
Not sure what board to post this in. Please feel free to move to another area of the board if it works better there.

So, I saw a post today that interested me and searched it up and found lots of similar results from other people. Apparantly hell isn't a real place and instead is a mistranslation. Apparantly awful people don't get eternal suffering and instead just cease to exist (similar to how life was for them before being born)

Here's the full post and explanation. It was reassuring to hear this as I worry about peolle I know going to hell and hate to imagine them being tortured. So it's nice to know such a place doesn't exist

perhaps you could start by realizing just how ridiculous the entire idea is and how it really isn't even supported by the scriptures.

This concept of “Hell” as a place of ‘eternal suffering in a lake of fire’ that Christians so often try to scare people with is all made up by humans and doesn't even exist in the 'old testament' and is not well supported by the 'new testament' either...

every single 'old testament' reference to "hell" is a mistranslations of the Jewish concept of "Sheol" which is distinctly different from what most people today refer to as "Hell".

1: Sheol is temporary - not 'eternal'. you are only there until 'judgment day'.

2: everyone goes to Sheol to await judgment day. (good or bad, believer or not).

3: everyone in Sheol atones for their misdeeds in life. everyone, regardless of whether they "have faith" or not. You don't escape punishment for your misdeeds in life just because you 'have faith'. THAT was an invention (apparently of Paul).

4: after judgment: the 'truly wicked' are annihilated: They 'cease to exist'. They are not "punished for the rest of eternity. (That view is not supported by anything in the bible outside of 'revelation' (and even that is pretty thin)

5: after judgment: everyone else goes to "Olam Ha'Bah" (aka "the world to come"; "gan eden" or "the Garden of Eden). - This did NOT require belief in or worship of "YHWH" it was based on whether you were a decent person in life; not "blind faith".

outside of 'revelation" The "New Testament" does not refer to this concept of 'eternal punishment' at all. not once, not anywhere. It is ONLY mentioned in the "Book of Revelation" (aka "The Apocalypse of John") and even those references are pretty flimsy evidence.

every "New Testament" reference to "Hell" in modern translations are mistranslating one of three words. “Hades” (which means “the grave” and does not imply torment); "Tartarus" (which appears only one time in 2 Peter 2:4) and "Gehenna".

Tartarus is a specific reference to the pagan concept of the 'lowest level of hades'; The word “Tartarus” is arguably the closest word used to this concept of eternal torment but this word is only used in one specific verse: 2 Peter 2:4 which is talking about a place where "fallen angels" are sent and is never mentioned as a destination for humans. - Also note that this same verse clearly limits the time spent in that place to "until judgment".

Gehenna is an actual physical place in Jerusalem, it was (in the first century CE) possibly a trash dump, garbage we know dead bodies were taken there and burned in a 'eternal fire' (a constantly burning fire that was always burning garbage). it was considered a "cursed place" due to legends about people sacrificing children there. It was mentioned in a lot of parables; often 'jesus' talking about wealthy people ending up in Gehenna (just like all the poor people). essentially saying that all their wealth doesn't save them from eventually dying and being thrown into the trash heap. - The parables did seem to imply that “Gehenna” was some undesirable place but it’s very dishonest to claim that the word literally translates to the common concept called “Hell”.

The words translated into “Eternal Punishment” in Matthew 25:46 (for instance) is also a mistranslation. The word they translate as “eternal” there is “αἰώνῐος” which is more correctly translated as “lasting for an age”. If you note the same exact word is mistranslated to ‘eternal’ in modern translations of Jude 1:7 where Sodom and Gomorrah are supposedly destroyed by “eternal fire” - Those fires are clearly not burning today as we’ve never found any such remnants anywhere on earth of this supposedly never ending fire. The other part of that phrase for “Punishment” is also a poor translation of “kolasis” which was an agricultural term basically meaning “cut off” or “prune” - possibly suggesting the concept where you “prune away part of a plant and the rest of the plant gets stronger”. It could possibly refer to “punitive correction” as opposed to some eternal torment or possibly it refers to being ‘cut off from paradise/eternal life’ which is effectively what happens when you cease to exist. - you aren’t suffering but you are denied eternal life and entry to paradise ‘for eternity’ since you no longer exist.

Outside of Revelation the most common

Outside of Revelation the most common thing people tend to bring up to support this 'eternal suffering in a lake of fire' nonsense is the story from Luke 16:19-31 of "lazarus and rich man". That parable however does not suggest "eternal suffering" at all.

1: Abraham, Lazarus and "Rich Man" are all in the same place. - That already sounds a lot more like "Sheol" than "Hell". the claim that all of them talking to each other is clearly not a reference to one being "in heaven" and the other "in hell" since these places are always depicted as separate.

2: "Rich Man" is suffering but... he's complaining about "being thirsty".... if he were burning in a lake of fire I think he'd have bigger problems than 'parched lips'.

3: Nothing about that story says anything to suggest that the suffering is eternal; it only implies that "Rich Man" is suffering currently, not what his fate would be down the road.

Then we have the claims from "Revelation":

1: the "Second Death" is mentioned 4 times in this book; and described as the "Death of the soul"

2: Revelation 20:6 states that only people named in the "book of life" (those "on the right") receive "eternal life" - this gift of eternal life is ONLY for the righteous people that pass into paradise.

3: Revelation 20:10 states that the 'beast', the 'false prophet' (aka the antichrist) and 'satan' are cast into the lake of fire where they will "suffer for ever and ever" - note that none of these entities are 'human'.

4: then in Revelation 20:15 - the people who's name did not appear in the 'book of life' (those "on the left") are also cast into the same lake of fire where they "suffer the second death". - Note the different language... it does not say "suffer for ever and ever" but instead states that they "suffer the second death" - this suggests that their soul dies.. which is "Annihilation" not "eternal suffering". How can there be "eternal suffering" for people that do not have "eternal life"? - (see note 2 above).

Nothing about "eternal suffering" is consistent with anything in the bible. "Eternal suffering" is sadistic cruelty without any purpose or benefit. - It makes no rational sense if they are also trying to claim that 'god' is benevolent, loving, merciful etc. - Totally logically inconsistent with this view.

In the early days of the christian church there were several competing views of the afterlife that are a lot more consistent with the rest of the bible:

Annihilation" is the belief that "after judgment" the "truly wicked" are annihilated; they 'cease to exist' and that's it... no further suffering; they are gone. end of story. This is exactly what the Jewish traditional view of Sheol mentioned above taught and is logically consistent with the 'old testament'.

"universal salvation" or "universalism" is the belief that eventually everyone is saved. - This view treats suffering/punishment in the afterlife as reformative/corrective/judicial - meant to correct the recipient and is finite in duration - once you have atoned for your sins you get to move on to paradise with all the other people that ever lived. These were both pretty popular views in the early christian sects prior to ~425 CE;

The early christian sects disagreed considerably about which of these three views was 'correct'. “Basil the Great” specifically commented in ~370CE that the dominant view (of the time) was a belief in a limited purgatory, and others (such as Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, Didymus the blind, Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia wrote extensively about Universalism. There were some (mostly in Northern Africa around the coast of modern day Tunisia/Algeria) that were advocating the view of “Eternal Torment” but it wasn't until 425CE that the church unified on this 'eternal suffering' doctrine (largely through the writings of Augustine of Hippo – who came to Rome from a city near what is now Annaba Tunisia). This became the official version the church went with and the other views were deemed "heretical" and banned along with any early christian scriptures that supported those opposing views (such as the "Apocalypse of Peter").

Well, everlasting life is a gift from GOD , if we already have it how is it a gift ? GOD promises us everlasting life, why promise us something that we already have ? Is there anything about a human being that makes them immortal ? Paul said, this mortal must put on immortality in the resurrection When Jesus returns. Until the resurrection we are dead, the dead in Christ if we have died before his return. Receiving immortality is dependent upon our being successful in our Christian lives by submitting to GODS working in us with HIS love that changes our old sinful nature to be the divine nature. Then at the return of Christ be changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye from mortal to immortal.

concretecamper · 2025-12-10T19:51:03-0600

Michie said:
Can a young child truly be saved and on their way to Heaven? Can he or she be in the Kingdom of Heaven here on earth, one of those who is a genuine believer?

A Christian educator once said that the faith of a child — up to age 12 — could be called a “borrowed faith”; this faith could be borrowed from his parents or a Sunday school teacher. Then, in his early teens, the child would develop their “chosen faith,” ultimately moving on to their “owned faith.”

Now, when we think of a borrowed faith, do we also think of it as a saving faith? Not exactly, and not something you’d want to count on when you’re not totally confident.

Let’s see what Jesus had to say about children’s salvation. “At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, ‘Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?’ And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them and said, ‘Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven’” (Matthew 18:1-4).

Okay, so the disciples have a different question than I originally posed; they want to know who’s the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus calls a little child. In case you question whether this really is a young child, the Greek word is paidión, which means “little” or “young.” So, he didn’t just call a child, he called a little child. Now remember, in that culture, a 13-year-old boy enters manhood. Young people were married at 16. So, if they are calling a child little, they mean little.

Continued below.

Can a young child become a Christian?

Can a young child truly be saved and on their way to Heaven

www.christianpost.com

People become Christian through the Sacrament of Baptism. So yes, infants/young children can become Christian.

Vambram · 2025-12-10T19:47:07-0600

Praise the Lord.

GoldenBoy89 · 2025-12-10T19:45:54-0600

essentialsaltes said:
Trump says U.S. seized oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela
U.S. forces have seized an oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela, President Donald Trump said Wednesday.

“We’ve just seized a tanker on the coast of Venezuela — a large tanker,” Trump said during a meeting in the Roosevelt Room at the White House. He provided no detail on who owned the tanker or its destination.

[Trump] would not rule out a ground invasion of the South American nation.

(Ok, armchair generals, what sort of response would be justified for this provocation?)

This seems to undercut the need to kill the alleged traffickers on smaller vessels.

timothyu · 2025-12-10T19:45:22-0600

narnia59 said:
You mean because God told them to not eat of the tree, he was setting them up for failure?

He knew they were vulnerable or He wouldn't have mentioned it

Tinker Grey · 2025-12-10T19:45:17-0600

essentialsaltes said:
living or sitting

One might have thought "living" was sufficient.

durangodawood · 2025-12-10T19:44:28-0600

ThatRobGuy said:
Right, but when they did have that power the last time, they flubbed it.

So my question remains, what will be different about the 120th congress compared to the 116th congress?

You tell me. You're the one who proposed the D's should look into this. And the House of Representatives is the best toolkit they could ask for.

narnia59 · 2025-12-10T19:41:57-0600

timothyu said:
Yes or God wouldn't have given them a command

I'm confused.

You mean because God told them to not eat of the tree, he was setting them up for failure?

Dave... · 2025-12-10T19:41:29-0600

Dan Perez said:
And I see that you. are quoting some good verses but the TARES and WHEAT. is still speaking STILL. about ISRAL. and the

BODY of CHRIST begins with SAUL in Acts 9:5 and the BACK. up PROOF is. in. 1 TIM 1:16 as SAUL was the

FIRST ONE. //. P[ROTOS. that in ME. /. join. the Greek EMPHATIC , meaning. ONLY ME and no one ELSE. , PERIOD

Where many make mistakes are in ROM chapter 11. !!

dan p

Hey Dan.

The wheat and the chafe was just an expression that I borrowed from Scripture to make a distinction. People of the OT, believers, thought that they were saved because they were physical Israel. That's who Peter is speaking to in Acts. Physical Israel has wheat and chafe. Spiritual Israel only has wheat. In Acts 2:36, 41 Peter is calling physical Israel to Spiritual Israel by faith in Jesus. Jesus is the the Body of Christ. Only those placed into Him were part of that Spiritual church. That began at Pentecost when the Agent of that placing into was given, the Holy Spirit. Saul died having not received that Promise.

1 Tim 1:16? Did you quote the wrong verse?

Romans 9:6-13 Not all Israel is Israel.

CLEEB · 2025-12-10T19:35:21-0600

We

Paulwat said:
Not sure what board to post this in. Please feel free to move to another area of the board if it works better there.

So, I saw a post today that interested me and searched it up and found lots of similar results from other people. Apparantly hell isn't a real place and instead is a mistranslation. Apparantly awful people don't get eternal suffering and instead just cease to exist (similar to how life was for them before being born)

Here's the full post and explanation. It was reassuring to hear this as I worry about peolle I know going to hell and hate to imagine them being tortured. So it's nice to know such a place doesn't exist

perhaps you could start by realizing just how ridiculous the entire idea is and how it really isn't even supported by the scriptures.

This concept of “Hell” as a place of ‘eternal suffering in a lake of fire’ that Christians so often try to scare people with is all made up by humans and doesn't even exist in the 'old testament' and is not well supported by the 'new testament' either...

every single 'old testament' reference to "hell" is a mistranslations of the Jewish concept of "Sheol" which is distinctly different from what most people today refer to as "Hell".

1: Sheol is temporary - not 'eternal'. you are only there until 'judgment day'.

2: everyone goes to Sheol to await judgment day. (good or bad, believer or not).

3: everyone in Sheol atones for their misdeeds in life. everyone, regardless of whether they "have faith" or not. You don't escape punishment for your misdeeds in life just because you 'have faith'. THAT was an invention (apparently of Paul).

4: after judgment: the 'truly wicked' are annihilated: They 'cease to exist'. They are not "punished for the rest of eternity. (That view is not supported by anything in the bible outside of 'revelation' (and even that is pretty thin)

5: after judgment: everyone else goes to "Olam Ha'Bah" (aka "the world to come"; "gan eden" or "the Garden of Eden). - This did NOT require belief in or worship of "YHWH" it was based on whether you were a decent person in life; not "blind faith".

outside of 'revelation" The "New Testament" does not refer to this concept of 'eternal punishment' at all. not once, not anywhere. It is ONLY mentioned in the "Book of Revelation" (aka "The Apocalypse of John") and even those references are pretty flimsy evidence.

every "New Testament" reference to "Hell" in modern translations are mistranslating one of three words. “Hades” (which means “the grave” and does not imply torment); "Tartarus" (which appears only one time in 2 Peter 2:4) and "Gehenna".

Tartarus is a specific reference to the pagan concept of the 'lowest level of hades'; The word “Tartarus” is arguably the closest word used to this concept of eternal torment but this word is only used in one specific verse: 2 Peter 2:4 which is talking about a place where "fallen angels" are sent and is never mentioned as a destination for humans. - Also note that this same verse clearly limits the time spent in that place to "until judgment".

Gehenna is an actual physical place in Jerusalem, it was (in the first century CE) possibly a trash dump, garbage we know dead bodies were taken there and burned in a 'eternal fire' (a constantly burning fire that was always burning garbage). it was considered a "cursed place" due to legends about people sacrificing children there. It was mentioned in a lot of parables; often 'jesus' talking about wealthy people ending up in Gehenna (just like all the poor people). essentially saying that all their wealth doesn't save them from eventually dying and being thrown into the trash heap. - The parables did seem to imply that “Gehenna” was some undesirable place but it’s very dishonest to claim that the word literally translates to the common concept called “Hell”.

The words translated into “Eternal Punishment” in Matthew 25:46 (for instance) is also a mistranslation. The word they translate as “eternal” there is “αἰώνῐος” which is more correctly translated as “lasting for an age”. If you note the same exact word is mistranslated to ‘eternal’ in modern translations of Jude 1:7 where Sodom and Gomorrah are supposedly destroyed by “eternal fire” - Those fires are clearly not burning today as we’ve never found any such remnants anywhere on earth of this supposedly never ending fire. The other part of that phrase for “Punishment” is also a poor translation of “kolasis” which was an agricultural term basically meaning “cut off” or “prune” - possibly suggesting the concept where you “prune away part of a plant and the rest of the plant gets stronger”. It could possibly refer to “punitive correction” as opposed to some eternal torment or possibly it refers to being ‘cut off from paradise/eternal life’ which is effectively what happens when you cease to exist. - you aren’t suffering but you are denied eternal life and entry to paradise ‘for eternity’ since you no longer exist.

Outside of Revelation the most common

Outside of Revelation the most common thing people tend to bring up to support this 'eternal suffering in a lake of fire' nonsense is the story from Luke 16:19-31 of "lazarus and rich man". That parable however does not suggest "eternal suffering" at all.

1: Abraham, Lazarus and "Rich Man" are all in the same place. - That already sounds a lot more like "Sheol" than "Hell". the claim that all of them talking to each other is clearly not a reference to one being "in heaven" and the other "in hell" since these places are always depicted as separate.

2: "Rich Man" is suffering but... he's complaining about "being thirsty".... if he were burning in a lake of fire I think he'd have bigger problems than 'parched lips'.

3: Nothing about that story says anything to suggest that the suffering is eternal; it only implies that "Rich Man" is suffering currently, not what his fate would be down the road.

Then we have the claims from "Revelation":

1: the "Second Death" is mentioned 4 times in this book; and described as the "Death of the soul"

2: Revelation 20:6 states that only people named in the "book of life" (those "on the right") receive "eternal life" - this gift of eternal life is ONLY for the righteous people that pass into paradise.

3: Revelation 20:10 states that the 'beast', the 'false prophet' (aka the antichrist) and 'satan' are cast into the lake of fire where they will "suffer for ever and ever" - note that none of these entities are 'human'.

4: then in Revelation 20:15 - the people who's name did not appear in the 'book of life' (those "on the left") are also cast into the same lake of fire where they "suffer the second death". - Note the different language... it does not say "suffer for ever and ever" but instead states that they "suffer the second death" - this suggests that their soul dies.. which is "Annihilation" not "eternal suffering". How can there be "eternal suffering" for people that do not have "eternal life"? - (see note 2 above).

Nothing about "eternal suffering" is consistent with anything in the bible. "Eternal suffering" is sadistic cruelty without any purpose or benefit. - It makes no rational sense if they are also trying to claim that 'god' is benevolent, loving, merciful etc. - Totally logically inconsistent with this view.

In the early days of the christian church there were several competing views of the afterlife that are a lot more consistent with the rest of the bible:

Annihilation" is the belief that "after judgment" the "truly wicked" are annihilated; they 'cease to exist' and that's it... no further suffering; they are gone. end of story. This is exactly what the Jewish traditional view of Sheol mentioned above taught and is logically consistent with the 'old testament'.

"universal salvation" or "universalism" is the belief that eventually everyone is saved. - This view treats suffering/punishment in the afterlife as reformative/corrective/judicial - meant to correct the recipient and is finite in duration - once you have atoned for your sins you get to move on to paradise with all the other people that ever lived. These were both pretty popular views in the early christian sects prior to ~425 CE;

The early christian sects disagreed considerably about which of these three views was 'correct'. “Basil the Great” specifically commented in ~370CE that the dominant view (of the time) was a belief in a limited purgatory, and others (such as Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, Didymus the blind, Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia wrote extensively about Universalism. There were some (mostly in Northern Africa around the coast of modern day Tunisia/Algeria) that were advocating the view of “Eternal Torment” but it wasn't until 425CE that the church unified on this 'eternal suffering' doctrine (largely through the writings of Augustine of Hippo – who came to Rome from a city near what is now Annaba Tunisia). This became the official version the church went with and the other views were deemed "heretical" and banned along with any early christian scriptures that supported those opposing views (such as the "Apocalypse of Peter"

Ivan Hlavanda · 2025-12-10T19:34:39-0600

Yarddog said:
AI generated:
Biblical allegory is the interpretation of a biblical story or passage as having a symbolic meaning beyond its literal meaning, where characters, events, and settings represent abstract ideas or spiritual truths. Examples include the story of Adam and Eve symbolizing the fall into sin, or the story of Sarah and Hagar representing the old and new covenants, respectively.

Thus, Adam can be a literal person and also be an allegory, as Sarah is the new Covenant, according to Paul.

Please don't give me AI responses

Ivan Hlavanda · 2025-12-10T19:33:36-0600

AaronClaricus said:
Of course this interpretation would also support the hypothesis of pre-adamic men.

1 Cor 15:45 says otherwise "So it is written: 'The first man Adam became a living being'; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit".

Yarddog · 2025-12-10T19:33:08-0600

Ivan Hlavanda said:
What then, were the authors of Genesis 2-3 and of Romans 5, who both speak of Adam, intending to convey? Genesis 2-3 does not show any of signs of “exalted prose narrative” or poetry. It reads as the account of real events; it looks like history.

AI generated:
Biblical allegory is the interpretation of a biblical story or passage as having a symbolic meaning beyond its literal meaning, where characters, events, and settings represent abstract ideas or spiritual truths. Examples include the story of Adam and Eve symbolizing the fall into sin, or the story of Sarah and Hagar representing the old and new covenants, respectively.

Thus, Adam can be a literal person and also be an allegory, as Sarah is the new Covenant, according to Paul.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Likely Identification​

How It Was Produced​

Typical Contexts​

Geological Note​

Trump says U.S. seized oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela​

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page

Likely Identification

How It Was Produced

Typical Contexts

Geological Note

Trump says U.S. seized oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela