poll can a person still come out of hell. mutiple votes allowed
- Thread starter de-emerald
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
It's interesting that you cited Revelation 20:15 but did not include it.
"And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." - Revelation 20:13-15 KJV
In Rev 20, verse 13 says hell is emptied. Verse 14 says hell is cast into the Lake of Fire. And then in verse 15 those without their name in the book are cast into the Lake of Fire.
This passage does not state that no one from hell had their name in the book of life. You could interpret that to be the case, but it is not a necessary interpretation.
"And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." - Revelation 20:13-15 KJV
In Rev 20, verse 13 says hell is emptied. Verse 14 says hell is cast into the Lake of Fire. And then in verse 15 those without their name in the book are cast into the Lake of Fire.
This passage does not state that no one from hell had their name in the book of life. You could interpret that to be the case, but it is not a necessary interpretation.
-
1
- Show all
Ok why do i ask you say. well its because of there being two or maybe 3 sides to hades. is why im asking first most. i dont underestand that abrahams bussom would be seen as hades and i cant understand why there is currently one lake of fire that people will be pulled out of to be Judged only to put back in again. First of there is a place right now where people are in the hell fire. which is one hell.. they will be pulled out and stand befor the great white throne im led to believe. where im led to believe they will recieve a gloryfied body then chucked into a diffrent lake of fire prepared for satan and his demons also.. so this is now two sides to hell.. then the third side of hades is known as abrahams bussom where the belivers go awaiting there glorfied body to.. so which one is it ?.. If people are right that people are pulled out of the hell fire to be rejudged and recieve a gloryfied body and then chucked back into another fire that means they come out of hell.. so this is very confusing. is there a chance they could be saved in the great white throne room befor they get chucked into the second fire ?
Lastly no one challenged a member here months ago when he said the wicked currently burning in hell will also recieve a gloryfied body but then thrown into another hell fire ?.. so im assuming either this must be correct or nobody challenged it for some reason.
The really confusing part for me is that satans punishement of hell is allready been dealt but yet hes still here on earth. then to cap it all of many people believe it a persons own fault if they fall for his lies or if he possesses some one its there own fault there not saved.
Lastly no one challenged a member here months ago when he said the wicked currently burning in hell will also recieve a gloryfied body but then thrown into another hell fire ?.. so im assuming either this must be correct or nobody challenged it for some reason.
The really confusing part for me is that satans punishement of hell is allready been dealt but yet hes still here on earth. then to cap it all of many people believe it a persons own fault if they fall for his lies or if he possesses some one its there own fault there not saved.
I did not say you were backing up this heresy with the Apostle's Creed at all. I don't think you even mentioned it. I was merely bringing it up, in case anyone wanted to use it as a defense.
I apologize for making it seem like I was calling you out. It retrospect, I can see why you might have thought that. So, I am sorry for that!
However, you brought up a piece of outright bad theology, and you are now justifying it with a random opinion that a lot of people believe that! Seriously?
There are a lot of bad doctrines out there that people believe to be true. However, they have no scripture to back them up, or worse, twisted, out of context Scripture. If every single person in the world believed that the Catholic Church was right, based on the Bible, I would never believe that. At one time, all of Europe buckled under the Catholic Church. That was a battle the Reformers fought, and they based their arguments on the Bible. That is why I am arguing with the OP. He has come into this forum, and is sneakily trying to convince everyone that Purgatory exists! The brunt of his arguments are about a place where you can be punished for your sins, and then get out. That is the definition of Purgatory, and why I am throwing the Bible at him!
You might also want to read the Bible from cover to cover. I've done it 55 times, including in French, the NT in Koine Greek many times, books of the OT in Biblical Hebrew, and working through German. I always learn more about God and draw closer to him, when I read daily. I highly recommend it! Just a suggestion!
I apologize for making it seem like I was calling you out. It retrospect, I can see why you might have thought that. So, I am sorry for that!
However, you brought up a piece of outright bad theology, and you are now justifying it with a random opinion that a lot of people believe that! Seriously?
There are a lot of bad doctrines out there that people believe to be true. However, they have no scripture to back them up, or worse, twisted, out of context Scripture. If every single person in the world believed that the Catholic Church was right, based on the Bible, I would never believe that. At one time, all of Europe buckled under the Catholic Church. That was a battle the Reformers fought, and they based their arguments on the Bible. That is why I am arguing with the OP. He has come into this forum, and is sneakily trying to convince everyone that Purgatory exists! The brunt of his arguments are about a place where you can be punished for your sins, and then get out. That is the definition of Purgatory, and why I am throwing the Bible at him!
You might also want to read the Bible from cover to cover. I've done it 55 times, including in French, the NT in Koine Greek many times, books of the OT in Biblical Hebrew, and working through German. I always learn more about God and draw closer to him, when I read daily. I highly recommend it! Just a suggestion!
-
1
- Show all
Until you start using the actual Bible to defend your hypothesis, with the address (book, chapter and verse!) I am sorry, but I have to argue. Using the Bible!
You do not understand the Bible or the gospel. You would not have even brought up this topic if you did. And, you would have quoted the Bible to defend your opinions. Except there is nothing in the Bible that can defend this ridiculous idea. In the BIBLE Discussion Forum, we use the Bible to back up our claims. You are new, you might not know that.
As for not being Catholic, why is most of your doctrine aligned with Catholic doctrine? Again, using the Bible, quoting properly would dispel the idea you are Catholic. Even Catholics read and use the Bible. I read and study the top modern Catholic scholars. I've learned lots. But not from Catholics who don't know the Bible. Because the Bible is true, and must be the foundation of our faith and beliefs!
You do not understand the Bible or the gospel. You would not have even brought up this topic if you did. And, you would have quoted the Bible to defend your opinions. Except there is nothing in the Bible that can defend this ridiculous idea. In the BIBLE Discussion Forum, we use the Bible to back up our claims. You are new, you might not know that.
As for not being Catholic, why is most of your doctrine aligned with Catholic doctrine? Again, using the Bible, quoting properly would dispel the idea you are Catholic. Even Catholics read and use the Bible. I read and study the top modern Catholic scholars. I've learned lots. But not from Catholics who don't know the Bible. Because the Bible is true, and must be the foundation of our faith and beliefs!
-
2
- Show all
I don't think anyone here was disputing the Lake of Fire as a final destination. The question comes back to Hades and whether one's fate is sealed (destined for the Lake of Fire) if they wake up tormented in Hades. My position is that the text isn't clear whether that is the case or whether salvation could be found while in Hades (salvation found after death). The implication of salvation after death (if true) is that the rich man in Hades could find salvation and have his name in the book of life come judgement (avoid the Lake of Fire).
Your comment before was: "rejection of jesus in this lifetime and still hope to get out of hell in the next?"
Your question could apply to the rich man in Hades if the afterlife is considered the "next life". Why would we assume that the rich man couldn't find Christ? I haven't found the arguments against the possibility of salvation after death very compelling so far.
Your comment before was: "rejection of jesus in this lifetime and still hope to get out of hell in the next?"
Your question could apply to the rich man in Hades if the afterlife is considered the "next life". Why would we assume that the rich man couldn't find Christ? I haven't found the arguments against the possibility of salvation after death very compelling so far.
I like your style and I appreciate your passion and candor and I especially like that you bring up a great point
For context, the line "descended into hell [or the dead... or Hades] and rose again on the third day" comes from the Apostles creed. Appealing to the Apostles creed only on the basis of its popularity is an argument from ethos (rather than a good logos argument). Thank you for keeping me in check on that note!
That said, we could make a case for a purgatory interpretation and we could make a case for the possibility of salvation after death. Those interpretations can be consistent with scripture without necessarily being true. When we look at different conflicting interpretations, the next step is to determine what we personally find to be most compelling. Each of us might have slightly different reasons for finding each perspective compelling or not.
We see scriptural references to different "spiritual species" if that makes sense: goats vs sheep, wheat vs tares. Some people will just be entirely incapable of producing the spiritual fruit that leads to salvation. But for those that are saved we see references to a purification (or perhaps more than one purification step). This is likely the basis for most of the purgatory interpretations. The interpretations usually involve some unpleasant torment that is related to the nature of our sins, but the concept is usually premised in the idea that they are already saved (that they are the wheat or sheep... of the saved "spiritual species" or nature). The concept of being saved after death would have to follow the concept that it was in that person's nature to find Christ to begin with, but that for whatever reason it didn't happen in their fleshly life (but that God had intended for their opportunity to be after death for whatever reason).
^ from the perspective of scripture, all of that purgatory interpretation is strictly hypothetical and not authoritative. Purgatory isn't explicitly evident in scripture. If that was what you saw as bad theology, I'm curious why you would see it that way?
For context, the line "descended into hell [or the dead... or Hades] and rose again on the third day" comes from the Apostles creed. Appealing to the Apostles creed only on the basis of its popularity is an argument from ethos (rather than a good logos argument). Thank you for keeping me in check on that note!
That said, we could make a case for a purgatory interpretation and we could make a case for the possibility of salvation after death. Those interpretations can be consistent with scripture without necessarily being true. When we look at different conflicting interpretations, the next step is to determine what we personally find to be most compelling. Each of us might have slightly different reasons for finding each perspective compelling or not.
We see scriptural references to different "spiritual species" if that makes sense: goats vs sheep, wheat vs tares. Some people will just be entirely incapable of producing the spiritual fruit that leads to salvation. But for those that are saved we see references to a purification (or perhaps more than one purification step). This is likely the basis for most of the purgatory interpretations. The interpretations usually involve some unpleasant torment that is related to the nature of our sins, but the concept is usually premised in the idea that they are already saved (that they are the wheat or sheep... of the saved "spiritual species" or nature). The concept of being saved after death would have to follow the concept that it was in that person's nature to find Christ to begin with, but that for whatever reason it didn't happen in their fleshly life (but that God had intended for their opportunity to be after death for whatever reason).
^ from the perspective of scripture, all of that purgatory interpretation is strictly hypothetical and not authoritative. Purgatory isn't explicitly evident in scripture. If that was what you saw as bad theology, I'm curious why you would see it that way?
I may not know completely know or understand this topic that i have brought up. But only not understanding in the sense I'm having troubling understanding certain aspects of this topic
This does not render me not understanding the bible as you put it, which could be translated as me not understanding the whole bible. This is one topic that is related to the whole bible granted, but if this is your reason for saying i don't understand the bible because of this one topic and you carry on to persist and hold to this judgement then you are mistaken.
The whole bible i do know and read i have quoted and spoke from passages in this thread and recited many passages from my memory and not quoted the verse directly from the bible but recited the verse from my memory. I do this all the time.
My studies, I have studied for years and years. My main study for the last years has been how people are deceived, and studying the trickery of the devil and studying practicing worship to. Which really does include reading the whole bible.
This topic being related to a catholic doctrine that you may not agree with has nothing to do with me whatsoever.
If i have said something that appears to be in line with a catholic doctrine that you do not agree with, then please tell me because i have no idea and i did not even read your whole two last posts i read the first two sentences and chose not to read any more because of how not true about me it was...
IF you want to discuss catholic doctrine, i suggest you open another forum, or we can start again and you can explain catholic doctrines to me without it upsetting you. The best way to beet a spiritual enemy is not to become offended. otherwise we all end up offending each other.
This does not render me not understanding the bible as you put it, which could be translated as me not understanding the whole bible. This is one topic that is related to the whole bible granted, but if this is your reason for saying i don't understand the bible because of this one topic and you carry on to persist and hold to this judgement then you are mistaken.
The whole bible i do know and read i have quoted and spoke from passages in this thread and recited many passages from my memory and not quoted the verse directly from the bible but recited the verse from my memory. I do this all the time.
My studies, I have studied for years and years. My main study for the last years has been how people are deceived, and studying the trickery of the devil and studying practicing worship to. Which really does include reading the whole bible.
This topic being related to a catholic doctrine that you may not agree with has nothing to do with me whatsoever.
If i have said something that appears to be in line with a catholic doctrine that you do not agree with, then please tell me because i have no idea and i did not even read your whole two last posts i read the first two sentences and chose not to read any more because of how not true about me it was...
IF you want to discuss catholic doctrine, i suggest you open another forum, or we can start again and you can explain catholic doctrines to me without it upsetting you. The best way to beet a spiritual enemy is not to become offended. otherwise we all end up offending each other.
Considering one of the initial poll responses includes: "hell can also be a place on earth for a sinner" and some translations don't differentiate between Hades and the place of fire, what you claim is not necessarily the case.
If you are claiming hell should only be considered the place of fire, then your position is that no one is currently in hell?
If you are claiming hell should only be considered the place of fire, then your position is that no one is currently in hell?
Hades is from the Greek mythology's name for the bode of the dead.
Hell, as a name , is derived from then name for the home of the dead Hel is from the Norse influence.
These names are used to substituting the word sheol, the Hebrew place where the deceased sleep in the dust. There is also the name Hoelle, Germanic, related to the same.
The idea of a hell being the eternal abode of fire comes from the lake of fire yet to come.
Everyone, go ahead and listen to each other though, but do not study the places' names, gosh, there would be no confusion were all to do so.
Googled: Proto-Germanic * xalja-wītjan (or * halja-wītjan) is reconstructed from Old Norse hel-víti 'hell', Old English helle-wíte 'hell-torment, hell', Old Saxon helli-wīti 'hell', and the Middle High German feminine noun helle-wīze.
Hell, as a name , is derived from then name for the home of the dead Hel is from the Norse influence.
These names are used to substituting the word sheol, the Hebrew place where the deceased sleep in the dust. There is also the name Hoelle, Germanic, related to the same.
The idea of a hell being the eternal abode of fire comes from the lake of fire yet to come.
Everyone, go ahead and listen to each other though, but do not study the places' names, gosh, there would be no confusion were all to do so.
Googled: Proto-Germanic * xalja-wītjan (or * halja-wītjan) is reconstructed from Old Norse hel-víti 'hell', Old English helle-wíte 'hell-torment, hell', Old Saxon helli-wīti 'hell', and the Middle High German feminine noun helle-wīze.