|
Post by ChristVader on Aug 5, 2005 6:35:38 GMT -5
See next post below.
|
|
|
Post by ChristVader on Aug 5, 2005 6:56:44 GMT -5
I am not running rabbitt trails John. How can we persue a resolution ot a Scriptural delima if terms and boundries are not established?
I have had too many discussions with you where this exact thing has happened.
Eternal is dealing with it too, as he has even made the statement in so many words, ..."so you dissagree with the Creeds on this point?". Why would he ask that question John? Because he has had prior experiences just like mine where you have changed positions to avoid dealing with this issue or that issue. So yes it is relevant.
Eternal or myself have never had to ask HipHopHead something like this. Nor Smurf, Nor King Neb. Why is that John?
Now, lets get back to Scripture. When Peter says DOWN does he mean DOWN?
Kent
|
|
|
Post by ChristVader on Aug 5, 2005 8:27:24 GMT -5
Never mind on the Peter reference...see below from Youngs Literal; this is "prison" is not that "hell" we all talk about today. Check the context, Peter has some major metaphores going on here...
1Peter 3:18--
We must go to some other Scripture's for this one.
I think the question of "what is the penalty for sin" is really the main issue here. Either Christ took it ALL upon Himself for us, or He didn't.
Beyond that I am listening to Scriptural arguments alone.
Kent
|
|
|
Post by eternal on Aug 5, 2005 14:56:08 GMT -5
Kent, it seems like you are looking for an argument. Please just allow the CONVERSATION to develop on its own, and not try and jump the gun and try to pin someone into the corner, which would pressumably kill the discussion before any fruit was able to bear.
I know people who do that, and I typicaly feel they do this because they do not want to see the convo flourish, but rather see it more advantageous to kill the thread early in a shroud of scandal. I don't know if these are your intentions or not, but I do know that many will see this and think that.
Please be more hospitable when in the thread.
|
|
|
Post by ChristVader on Aug 7, 2005 16:47:30 GMT -5
Eternal,
Thanks Eternal. Will do.
Kent
|
|
|
Post by DoGMaTiX on Aug 7, 2005 17:24:26 GMT -5
Kent, it seems like you are looking for an argument. Please just allow the CONVERSATION to develop on its own, and not try and jump the gun and try to pin someone into the corner, which would pressumably kill the discussion before any fruit was able to bear. I know people who do that, and I typicaly feel they do this because they do not want to see the convo flourish, but rather see it more advantageous to kill the thread early in a shroud of scandal. I don't know if these are your intentions or not, but I do know that many will see this and think that. Please be more hospitable when in the thread. Thank you Eternal. Neb, not interested Kent, My point stands.
|
|
|
Post by ChristVader on Aug 8, 2005 13:30:16 GMT -5
Roldan,
Can you cut and paste that point please?
Kent
|
|
|
Post by DoGMaTiX on Aug 8, 2005 13:48:31 GMT -5
What is the punishment for sin Roldan? Death and spiritual separation from the Father which was all done on the cross where He died and The Father turned His face from Christ and left Him alone, hence Christs outcry "Father why have you forsaken me"? Kent, according to your paradigm there is no Hell anyways. You say that Heaven is NOT a place but a status and the antithesis of heaven is hell, so hell is also a status of spiritual separation from God which does NOT require a literal place called Hell, right? How can Jesus go to a status? Again another inconsistancy in your framework. one
|
|