All Activity

Generously sufficient, thank you! Can you explain further what you mean by "quantitative immeasurable"? That brings back a memory of a blood test with my "quantitative covid antibody results" i.e. numerical antibody count. LOL

I can't use the first line because it contains the title.

I am reminded of Aunt Jackie, Mom's sister. She had a business called... The Business. Nope. That's right. Just, The Business. Or sometimes, Tha Business. She found a way to insert the phrase "The Business" into EVERY conversation, regardless of relevance. She'd just MAKE it relevant. The vagueness was deliberate and calculated. Anyone: "Oh, your business, Jackie? What is that? What kind of business?" Jackie: "Are you really interested to know? Do you have six hours after dinner for me and your uncle to tell you all about it?" Anyone: "No." Jackie: "How 'bout all day Sunday?" Similarly, Anyone: "Can you recommend a 'good' translation, John?" JS: "Why, yes. Yes, I can..." (The business? Amway. The translation? REV)

Bingo and bingo. I'm not sure about this one yet? It might come to me.

My mistake - the thread is in the Matters of Faith forum.

That's cool.

My apologies to you personally. I thought I was clear that this was as a species, not a criticism directed at you personally. I thought I was as far from singling you out as I could possibly be. But it is inherent in our opposing views that we will occasionally step on each other's toes. So allow me to rephrase, please, in a way that does not insult anyone directly or indirectly: Again with my apologies, is that better?

Hold on a minute... I don't think (or hope) any of us in this discussion on either side is being arrogant about their beliefs.

Since this is the "atheism" side of the fence as far as conversation goes, it's not off topic to posit that the soul simply does not exist. It is a function of the body, the name we give to this complex firing of synapses that I cannot begin to articulate because of its chemical complexity, but when the body stops, so does the soul. We believe that for almost literally every other animal. But in our arrogance as a species, we imagine ourselves to be an exception. We, alone in the animal kingdom, possess a quantitative, immeasurable attribute that contains our personality and will survive the cessation of our physical bodies. I know, the alternative is to have "no hope," and that leads to a feeling of, well, hopelessness. Then again, 10 trillion trillion years from now, I will not be burning in hell, so I have that going for me.

I appreciate and have no dispute what John is teaching, only adding an opposite opinion above. Put in legal terms, for me; let's say I'm still in the "discovery" phase of the argument...

I'm thinking that I may have crossed the line by sharing my atheistic idea on a doctrinal forum by calling God's torment in the lake of fire of the unsaved/wicked (whether temporary or eternal) as being abhorrent. My biblical critique of the doctrine would be whether the word "fire" used in Schoenheit's Appendix 4 is figurative or literal or a mixture of both. That I do not know.

If you go over to the doctrinal subforum, there is the thread "Salvation Universal or Not?" where I shared John Schoenheit's Appendix 4 from his REV bible. It's basically the written form of the doctrine he teaches in the tape. His point #6 is called "The 'immortal soul' is not biblical; the Bible never says the soul is immortal," if you are interested in reading it.

JS never once says in his Appendix that "fire" is used figuratively when it comes to the lake of fire. So, what he is teaching in his point #10 is that the torture in the Lake of Fire, before one actually dies, is similar in nature to how garbage actually burns up - some things take longer than others before they are nothing but ashes. This idea of actually burning for any length of time is simply abhorrent. I think it shows how deceitful his opening paragraphs are when he wants to defend that God is love. In those paragraphs, he only refers to how unloving, unrighteous and coldhearted eternal torment would be and does not even mention temporary torment, only the unsaved being "annihilated." So, by the time you get to point #10, the God of Love now appears to see temporary torment as loving and righteous. He writes (underlining is mine): "One of the most powerful truths about God in the Bible is “God is love,” but some Christians teach that God tortures the unsaved in the flames of hell for all eternity. How could that be love? Thankfully, God does not do that. The Bible says that the saved will live forever and the unsaved will be annihilated in the Lake of Fire. There is no “eternal torment” in the Bible. There are a number of important reasons why many people have had difficulty believing that God would torture people eternally. One reason that we have just seen is that God is love and torturing people forever is not love. Another reason is that God is righteous, it is not logical that someone could commit sin in one short lifetime that would be justly recompensed by being tormented forever. How could everlasting torture be just or righteous? Also, the doctrine of eternal torture makes saved people seem very cold-hearted. Could it really be that the saved are rejoicing forever while hearing the screams of people being tortured forever? And frankly, even if the saved could not hear the cries of the damned, would that make such a big difference? Just knowing that people were being tortured forever would seem to make everlasting life hard to enjoy. Civilized people will not even torture their worst enemies here on earth; does that change when the saved are perfected? Unsaved people are not tortured forever, and the teaching that they are contradicts many clear and simple scriptures."

Matthew 18 does show that without forgiveness, the debt must be paid. Once it is paid, the person is released. If it is not paid, the person remains in prison. The parable does not support his doctrine though which is "The wicked are annihilated after a period of suffering, and that period of suffering fulfills the Word of God and the justice of God." In that sense, he is not talking about purgatory where Catholics go from there only to heaven. He does list 9 verses that talk about being judged "according to one's works." Do you think these verses support there is suffering according to one's works before one is destroyed in the Lake of Fire?

After watching the tape, I have to say his argument is a good one. But I need to pray about and further study his teaching but must also include St. Thomas Aquinas' opposite take that the soul is immoral. In sum, Aquinas has argued that the soul (a spiritual entity) cannot be destroyed by fire (a physical entity). Here's some of what Aquinas argued: AI Overview St. Thomas Aquinas' most renowned work, the Summa Theologica, contains his arguments concerning the soul as a spiritual, simple, and indivisible entity, which cannot be destroyed in the same way that material substances can. Explanation: Aquinas elaborates on the nature of the soul and its relation to the body in the Summa Theologica, particularly in the First Part. He argues that the soul is the substantial form of the body, meaning it is the principle by which a human being is animated and unified. He maintains that because the soul is immaterial, it is not composed of parts and thus cannot be broken down or corrupted like material substances. Key Points in the Summa Theologica concerning the Soul: Simplicity and Indivisibility: The soul is considered simple because it is a spiritual substance, unlike material objects which are composed of matter and form. This simplicity makes it indivisible, meaning it cannot be broken down into smaller parts. Immateriality: The soul's spiritual nature allows it to know universal truths, which cannot be contained within the limitations of material organs. This immateriality makes the soul incorruptible, as it is not subject to physical decay. Incorruptibility: Because the soul is not composed of parts and is not dependent on matter for its existence, it cannot be destroyed through the decomposition of the body. Note: Aquinas also explores the relationship between the soul and the body in his Commentary on Aristotle's Treatise on the soul and the Quaestiones Disputatae de Anima. These works provide further insight into his understanding of the human soul.

*reads the Appendix* So, he re-invented Purgatory, a name that does not appear in the Bible! I noticed he made an extensive case for everything EXCEPT the Purgatory. For that, he had EXACTLY ONE VERSE. (Matthew 18: 35.) One thing my twi experience taught me, was that, whenever I saw a doctrine based on EXACTLY ONE VERSE, to look at that verse a lot more carefully, because it was being misunderstood or misinterpreted. (Even its proponent couldn't find another verse that said that. He had to go to Romans 2:5- which doesn't say that- and add a word salad and then claim it DOES say that.) Matthew 18 ended with a proverb whose purpose was explaining forgiveness. I notice he was rather selective in reading into the Parable. He didn't read into the slave throwing the other slave in prison over 100 denarii owed himself here, just the last verse. I'd be a lot slower on the draw than to make either a glib comment, or worse, an entire doctrine, over a single verse like that. JS should know better. But then, if one's "education" is limited to twi and ex-twi, one can be hampered with problems like this for life. vpw hinged doctrines on a single verse all the time.

Appendix 4. Annihilation in the Lake of Fire I think John Schoenheit's doctrine above is a different viewpoint from what I've read above. It's all BS to me, but it might be of interest to someone. It's a long appendix so I'll quote what I think is the most pertinent part (underlining is mine). "10. People will be punished in proportion to their sin. Scripture says people will receive punishment for what they have done, and that the punishment will be in proportion to the sin they have committed. Romans 2:5 says of stubborn people, “you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God’s wrath.” Just as godly people by their good works store up treasure for the life to come, wicked people store up wrath for themselves. It would make no sense to say that a person “stored up wrath for themselves” if every person got the same “wrath,” that is, eternal torment. Jesus taught that people would be tortured “until” they paid back what they owed for their sin (Matt. 18:32-35). Theologians who believe in eternal torment claim that no one can ever pay for their sin, but no Scripture says that. In fact, Scripture is clear that sin can be paid for, and that is exactly what Jesus taught in Matthew 18:34 and what verses such as Romans 2:5 indicate. The clear message of Scripture is that unless people get forgiveness for their sins they will receive punishment for the evil they have done, but never does Scripture say the people deserve being punished forever (Ps. 62:12; Eccl. 11:9; Jer. 17:10; 32:19; Ezek. 33:20; Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; 2 Cor. 5:10; Rev. 2:23). Beings such as the Devil and his demons have stored up much wrath for themselves and will be punished for a very long time before they are destroyed. God metes out two different types of justice: corrective justice and retributive justice. Corrective justice is punishment that is meant to correct a behavior, while retributive justice is retribution, or repayment, for something that the person did (see commentary on 2 Thess. 1:8). Torment and then destruction in the Lake of Fire is not corrective, it is retributive; it is a righteous repayment for harm done. The demons knew this justice was coming, and so they said to Jesus, “Have you come to destroy us?” (Mark 1:24). Some theologians have argued against annihilation because they say it would not make sense for God to resurrect someone from the dead only to kill them again. That misses the fact that God’s annihilation in the Lake of Fire is a judgment, a retribution, a fulfillment of a promise, and a lesson to those still living. We can assume many evil people, the Pharisees are a good example, have died in complete confidence that they will be saved, and as rich and powerful people, often died in the comfort of their own homes, well-fed and cared for. Not only do wicked people such as those Pharisees need to be judged and fulfill the promise that “every knee will bow,” but their annihilation is not immediate. The wicked are annihilated after a period of suffering, and that period of suffering fulfills the Word of God and the justice of God. It seems clear that not every sinner spends equal time suffering, but the more wicked a person is, the more severe the punishment, fulfilling the Scripture that they have stored up wrath for the Day of Wrath. It is God’s just retribution that those who have ignored God and caused pain and suffering on earth will suffer in proportion to the evil they have done. Also, the suffering of the wicked before they are annihilated will show those who have everlasting life that God is truly just. God, through Jesus Christ, offered to pay for the sins of anyone who wished to accept that payment. Those people who rejected God’s offer, and thereby decided by default to pay for their own sins, had to make good their decision, and pay for their sins with suffering and death, just as Scripture said: “the wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23).

I need to correct the above post. After listening to the tape again, John Schoenheit did not use the phrase "right" translation, he said a "good" translation.

If you wonder why and how I came to write my memoir, Undertow, this blog post I wrote some years ago answers that question: Dear Rachel: This is How | Charlene L. Edge

I'll wait in this place where the sun never shines, wait in this place where the shadows run from themselves.

Vigilante I.C.U. The Wolf of Wall Street Whiskey Tango Foxtrot The Legend of Tarzan I, Tonya George

I Am, I said Night Moves

Moving on "She was a black-haired beauty with big dark eyes And points all her own sitting way up high"