The Instigator
lilrose
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Truthseeker01
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Hell is not a fiery place of torment

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/27/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 786 times Debate No: 114456
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)

 

lilrose

Pro

Webster"s Third New International Dictionary, unabridged, under "Hell" says: "fr[om] . . . helan to conceal." The word "hell" initially indicated no element of fire or suffering but simply of a "covered over or concealed place." In the old English dialect the expression "helling potatoes" meant, to place the potatoes in the ground or in a cellar.It never referred to roasting the potatoes in fire.
The Encyclopedia Americana (1956, Vol. XIV, p. 81) said: "Much confusion and misunderstanding has been caused through the early translators of the Bible persistently rendering the Hebrew Sheol and the Greek Hades and Gehenna by the word hell. The simple transliteration of these words by the translators of the revised editions of the Bible has not sufficed to appreciably clear up this confusion and misconception." Therefore most bible translators replaced the words "Sheol","Hades","Gehenna" as "Hell".
The Hebrew word " Sheol" means grave. Sheol is mentioned in the hebrew scriptures of the bible. The greek words-Hades and Gehenna as found in the greek scriptures of the bible refer to the grave.
In conclusion, in the original bible manuscripts the word hell was non-existent. Words such as sheol, gehenna and hades were used liberally in both the Hebrew and Greek scriptures of the holy Bible. There is no fiery place of torment. But there is the common grave of mankind.
Truthseeker01

Con

1) Roman catholic church teaching


The Roman catholic councils have always affirmed that hell is a real place wish eternal torment as punishment. I can provide sources if you dont concede this point.


2) Word of jesus


Mark 9 scriptures : to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

If hell is only a grave why is Jesus talking about eternal fire in this place?


3) Logic of the bible

Hell is a place of punishment as the justice of jesus. A grave would be basicly annihilation, so it means that sinners would just cease to exist without any punishment since they wouldnt be conscious if they are annihilated. It means that sinners would have some kind of a victory in sinning and nothing would stop a sinner to sin if that would be the only issue of sin.


Debate Round No. 1
lilrose

Pro

The Catholic Church actually discouraged their followers from reading the Bible on their own " a policy that intensified through the Middle Ages and later, with the addition of a prohibition forbidding translation of the Bible into native languages.
In 1199, Pope Innocent III condemned the translation of the bible book of Psalms into French.In 1211, By order of Pope Innocent III, Bishop Bertram of Metz organized a crusade against all people reading the Bible in the vernacular, and any such Bibles found were duly burned. So, I am not interested in what the Roman Catholic Council has to say concerning hell. They should rather be explaining why they prevented people from having free access to a personal copy of the bible.
Jesus words at Mark 9:42-49 "And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt." These words should not be taken literally. If it were to be taken literally then Jesus is alluding to self-mutilation."if thy hand offend thee, cut it off" "if thy foot offend thee cut it off" "if thy eye offend thee cut it off" If we were to follow this "cut it off" rule we will all be maimed maybe even dead as a result of severe mutilation of our bodies.
Further, Mark9:49 says "For every one shall be salted with fire". So if this fire is literal then everyone has been condemned to a fiery place of torment.
When reading the bible we have to read the whole context not just a verse. In this chapter of Mark 9, Jesus was using hyperbole. He was saying that a person should be willing to give up something as precious as a hand, a foot, or an eye rather than allow it to cause him to stumble into unfaithfulness.
Hell is not a place of punishment. its a grave. Ecclesiastes 3:19,20-"for that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again." Psalms146:4 "His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish."
Ecclesiastes 9:5,6 "for the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten so is their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun"
The dead is unconscious. They don't feel pain, envy or love. How can such an unconscious dead body be eternally punished when they can't even feel pain.Where is the logic?
Romans6:23 "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." The reason why humans die is because we are sinful. Exercising faith in Jesus Christ and dedicating our life to God gives us the hope of eternal life.
Using hellfire as a scare mechanism to prevent people from sinning is wrong. To err is human. We are all sinful. We sin everyday. No one is perfect. That is the reason why Jesus came to earth to die for our sins.
1John1:8,9-"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
Exekiel33:11-"Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?"
A loving God will never punish people in a fiery place of torment. We inherited sin from Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve the original sinners were sentenced to death not a fiery hell.Genesis3:3-"But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die." Why should their offspring be sentenced to fiery place of torment when they did not commit the original sin.Jesus didn't die for Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve are condemned to death. They have been completely annihilated. Jesus died for the offspring of Adam and Eve.
Truthseeker01

Con

1) My opponent is arguing that the catholic church was preventing people from reading the bible.

Answer: I will admit this point but I will give a number of reason to explain that.

- The interdiction of reading the bible in vernacular was a temporary disciplinary measure in a specific context that was the cathar heresy it was limited in a specifipart of france. As soon as cathar heresy stopped they authorized the reading again. It was like a police measure to avoid the spreading of heresy that's all.

- The 'cherry picking' of the bible lead people to interpret it on their own and if they are not guided they can be mistaken. That's why the catholic church was very careful with that because reading without a good comprehension and the lights needed can cause people to have an heretic point of view. We can see that in protestantism for instance, the lack of unity has caused different interpretation with a lot of contradictory vision of the bible, whereas the catholic church always kept his dogmas.

2) My opponent contest the fire and say it shouldn't be taken litteraly.

In Matthew passage when JC affirm that it is better to cut your arm than to go in hell, he isn't of course saying to really do it but the entire point of the passage is to warn us that hell is so bad that it would still be better to be mutilated than to go in hell. It is like saying that it is better that you sell your car, than having a deadly accident with it. The image part was the mutilation to express a reality fact the hell.

Why would Jesus Christ warn us about hell if it is only a grave and so it is the same thing than dying. Since every human is going to die then it would mean that the only difference between good people and bad people is that one would be ressurected and the other wouldn't. So using this logic Jesus would had only said that bad people wont go to heaven and it would be enough. Since he warned us about the danger of hell it is that obviously it is a severe punishment.

There are other passages in the scriptures about hell. Matthew 8: But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth

Once again if you are not conscious why JC says that they will be cry in hell ? If you are dead you are not aware of what is happening and you can't express your feelings.

We also have Lazarus story in Luke.

3) Denying hell and saying it will only be annihilation is even absurd when you think about human justice. If we applied your reasoning it means like i said that the only distinction between good and evil person is that once get a reward, the other dont get the reward. It would mean that we should give a reward like money to good people for not killing someone and that we should just not give the check to a killer... Its completely unreasonable.




Debate Round No. 2
lilrose

Pro

The Catholic Church had no right to prevent people from having a personal copy of the bible because they do not have authorship of the bible. God is the author of the bible and he wants all humans to have easy access to it.
The Catholic Church was afraid that once people have their own copy of the bible they will expose all the numerous false teachings such as hellfire propagated by the Catholic Church.
You cannot interpret Matthew 9 by saying the "cut if off "part is not literal but the " fire" is literal.
Mathew13:13-15"Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.'
Matthew 13:34,35-"All these things Jesus spoke unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable he spoke not unto them:That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world."
My point is Jesus used figures of speech liberally. His words should be understood in a context . Matthew 9 is another perfect example of hyperbole. Here are a few examples of hyperbole used by Jesus.
Matthew19:24-"And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God".
Matthew6:3-"But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:"
Matthew 7:3-5-"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
Mark11:23-"For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith".
You are more concerned about wicked people paying a penalty for their bad deeds. When Jesus was on earth and the prostitute Mary Magdalene was brought before him, Jesus did not condemn her.He said- "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.......When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."John8:3-11
Moreover,John5:28,29-" Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."
This is very clear that dead people in the grave will be resurrected. It doesn't say they will be resurrected out of a place of torment.It says "all that are in the graves shall hear his voice and come forth."
Also,Jeremiah7:31-"For the children of Judah have done evil in my sight, saith the LORD: they have set their abominations in the house which is called by my name, to pollute it. And they have built the high places of Tophet, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my heart."
In the context of this scripture,God was angry with Judah for burning their children to a false god. If hellfire was real ,would it not be hypocritical for God to condemn Judah for burning their children in fire when God burns dead people in fire.
Medical science defines death as the cessation of all biological functions that sustain a living organism. When someone is dead they are unresponsive ; incapable of being stirred emotionally or intellectually. Its impossible to torment a dead person in fire.
Matthew 12:40-'For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.' Jesus was in hell (grave) for three days.
Sin came into this world through Adam and Eve's disobedience. We inherited sin. You talk of justice, so how come the original sinners- Adam and Eve- were condemned to death not to a fiery place of torment?
Truthseeker01

Con

1) Pro states that the passage about hell shouldn't be interpretated litteraly, pro argues that Jesus was talking parabols in some occasion.

A parabole is a story with some fictional characters thus the passage of the bible that i cited (Matthew 8 and Mark 9 aren't paraboles), only the Lazarus story is one.

Lets analyze again my passages:


Mark 9 : to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

Matthew 8:
But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth

Pro thinks that these passage are only images or metaphors. But even with a metaphoric kind of interpretation it still conveys the idea that the place depicted as hell is a horrible place with some kind of conscious suffering. Pro still didn't explain how a 'sheol', 'grave', 'annhilitation' or other meet these 2 criterias as it is: a punitive place, conscious suffering.

2) It is unclear of pro position about people that die in their sin I dont understand if he thinks that they will be annihilated or ressurected. Pro needs to be clear and answer what will happen in his views for people that are damned.

3) Pro then tries to explain that hell would be impossible by saying that god mercy wouldn't permit that, he then states that god condemns child burning sacrifice and so god would be an 'hypocrite' the debate wasn't about legitimacy but reality of hell so i wont extend myself on this subject.

-Pro argument doesn't take into consideration that god has several infinite attributes: love, mercy of course but also justice. When Jesus saved Mary Magdalene he could condemn her for her sin with his justice it would be legitimate but he decided to give her mercy.

-There is no hypocrisy of god there he has all the rights to condemn people for bad actions. When god was condemning people from burning their children they were not doing it as a punishment in order to give justice they were doing a sacrifice to false god, they werent judges and childrens are innocent. Not at all the same situation than hell.

Debate Round No. 3
lilrose

Pro

Ecclesiastes 5:9,10 -"For the living know that they shall die, but the dead know nothing more, neither have they a reward any more: for the memory of them is forgotten.Whatsoever thy hand is able to do, do it earnestly: for neither work, nor reason, nor wisdom, nor knowledge shall be in hell, whither thou art hastening. "( Roman Catholic Douay Rheims 1899 edition) This clearly mentions hell as being a place where there is no work, reason, wisdom nor knowledge. It"s a place of inactivity-a grave.

Acts2:31,32(Roman Catholic Douay Rheims 1899 edition)-"He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses." The Apostle stated that Jesus went to hell and God resurrected him. If hell is a place of torment for the wicked, why did a righteous man like Jesus go there?

Psalms16:10-(King James Version)"For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption." The bible writer was confident that when he dies and goes to hell (grave). God wont forsake him.

Genesis 44:26-29-"(Roman Catholic Douay Rheims 1899 edition)-"And we said to him: We cannot go: if our youngest brother go down with us, we will set out together: otherwise, without him we dare not see the man's face.Whereunto he answered: You know that my wife bore me two.One went out, and you said: A beast devoured him: and hitherto he appeareth not. If you take this also, and any thing befall him in the way you will bring down my gray hairs with sorrow unto hell."

Job14:13-15-"O that thou wouldest hide me in the grave, that thou wouldest keep me secret, until thy wrath be past, that thou wouldest appoint me a set time, and remember me!If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come.Thou shalt call, and I will answer thee: thou wilt have a desire to the work of thine hands." Righteous Job said God would hide him in a grave(hell) and God will call him out of the grave(hell).

There are several scriptures that underscore the indisputable fact that the wicked will be punish if they don"t repent.
Psalms37:9,10-"For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth.For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be".
Isaiah 55:7-"Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon."
Isaiah48:22-"There is no peace, saith the LORD, unto the wicked."
Isaiah1:15-"And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood."
Malachi4:3-" And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts."

Hell fire is deeply rooted in paganism. Constantine was the Roman emperor who convened the Council of Nicaea( the first ecumenical council of the Christian church, meeting in ancient Nicaea . Emperor Constantine I, an unbaptized catechumen, who presided and dominated over the session in 325"C.E.)
Emperor Constantine influenced the church to adopt unscriptural doctrines such as hell fire. He did this to solidify his empire of pagans and Christians for political reasons.
Encyclopedia Britannica adds: "Under Christianity, Greek heroes and even deities survived as saints."
Emperor Constantine appointed the group of converted Christians to high positions in many parts of his empire.
Very aptly, historian Paul Johnson asks: "Did the empire surrender to Christianity, or did Christianity prostitute itself to the empire?"
Constantine also extended many benefits to pagan priests who became Christian ministers but still practiced paganism . For example, they received monetary support from the Empire and didn't pay taxes.
False teachings such as hellfire is partly the result of the political expediency and the crafty maneuvers of a pagan emperor-Constantine.
Truthseeker01

Con

1) Catholic church believed long before Nicaea council that hell existed.

For example it is reported that Polycarp was condemned to be burned by fire. Before his martyrdom here were his words : “You threaten me with fire which burns for an hour, and is then extinguished, but you know nothing of the fire of the coming judgment and eternal punishment, reserved for the ungodly. Why are you waiting? Bring on whatever you want.”

2) About the pagan belief.

It is true that pagan like platon did believe in hell and here was the reason. Pagan people were observing the world and noticed that good people were sometime having hard times even they were practicing some kind of justice. And bad people had a good life even tho they were doing wrong actions. So they came to the logic conclusion that bad people since they werent punished in our world had to be punished in the afterlife.

3) About pro still arguing on the hell/sheol word.

Lets put aside the word hell and you will still see example in Jesus words that he was talking about an eternal punishment.

Matthew 25: “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

... Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.

So now pro need to come out with a translation trick for the word punishment if he still wants to deny the evidence.



Debate Round No. 4
lilrose

Pro

Acts24:15-""And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust."
If there is hell fire, why will God resurrect the unjust ?
John11:25-"Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:"
Hosea13:14-"I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction: repentance shall be hid from mine eyes."
Revelation20:13-"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 work."
These scriptures underscore the indisputable fact that when humans die regardless of their sinful state -wicked or righteous- they both go to the grave. When its time for the resurrection,both the righteous and the unrighteous will be resurrected and judged.So where is the place of torment ?

1Corinthians15:12,22-"Now if Christ be preached, that he arose again from the dead, how do some among you say, that there is no resurrection of the dead?But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen again.And if Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God: because we have given testimony against God, that he hath raised up Christ; whom he hath not raised up, if the dead rise not again.For if the dead rise not again, neither is Christ risen again.And if Christ be not risen again, your faith is vain, for you are yet in your sins.Then they also that are fallen asleep in Christ, are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.But now Christ is risen from the dead, the first fruits of them that sleep:For by a man came death, and by a man the resurrection of the dead.And as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive"
Christ was in hell(grave) for three days.Everyone goes to hell. Hell is a common grave. It is not a place of torment.Righteous men like Abraham,David and Job went to hell.

Psalms 103:9-14 -"The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy.He will not always chide: neither will he keep his anger forever.He hath not dealt with us after our sins; nor rewarded us according to our iniquities.For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him.As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us.Like as a father pitieth his children, so the LORD pitieth them that fear him.For he knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust."
In line with this scripture, how come a God "who will not keep his anger forever","plenteous in mercy" and " who has removed our transgressions from us" punish unconscious dead bodies forever in a fiery torment?
I reiterate dead people are unconscious and cannot feel any pain.They cannot be tormented.

Appreciating Bible symbolism helps sincere bible readers to understand what Jesus meant when he spoke figuratively.Jesus used hyperbole liberally in his speech.Sadly, portions of scripture are quoted to argue against a point when in reality the entire context of the passage is ignored.Although there are 66 books in the Bible, it is in harmony from Genesis to Revelation. The bible doesn"t contradict itself. Every bible passage is part of a broader context.
No wonder theologians caution against building elaborate doctrines on obscure passages, or doing so by only referencing passages that appear to agree with your dogmatic doctrine, while ignoring other significant passages that oppose it.
The false doctrine of eternal torment has turned many churchgoers into atheists. Some christians are paralyzed by fear.Their hypocritical worship of God is grounded on a morbid fear of a loving God who has been sadistically misrepresented as a cruel monster who burns unconscious dead people in a fiery place forever.
In conclusion, hellfire is not a biblical teaching.It has pagan origin. Hell like Hades(Greek) ,Sheol (Hebrew)and Gehenna (Greek) are words referring to a common grave.

@Truthseeker01- I am glad you accepted the challenge. I still stand my ground-Hell is not a fiery place of torment.
Truthseeker01

Con

First of all I think my opponent for this interesting debate, I must say that i am disappointed that I couldn't change his mind I hope that he can think a bit deeper and appreciate the truthness of the roman catholic church teaching on this subject that can be sometime hard to accept in an emotional level but that is perfectly understandable in a rational way.

I will object 2 points that were made by Pro and come to my conclusion.

1) -Pro states: Acts24:15-""And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust."
If there is hell fire, why will God resurrect the unjust ?

Answer: God will resurrect the unjust so he they be punished it as simple as that since our soul is immortal. And by using this argument Pro just did concede that the unjust will not be annihilated. Thus, he contradicts himself it seems that he is just using passage of the bible to deny hell as opposed to having a coherent view on the afterlife.

-Pro seems to confuse the particuliar judgement that is after the death of every human being and the general judgement at the end of time.

-Pro also seems to confuse the temporary place were just/good people were staying before Jesus Christ died on the cross since the gate of heaven were closed before the sacrifice of the christ


2) Pro then argues that hell was a manipulation tactic made by catholic church to live in fear:

Pro also states that it has bring people to leave church.

- What was the interest of the catholic church to afraid people if they didn't honestly believe that hell was true ?
- You can see that a lot of catholic saints were genuinely affraid of hell and so they didn't preach on the dangers of going to hell just for power, success obviously
- You can see that what made people leave the church is the fact that the catholic church got more liberal and less harsh in his teaching. For proof you can see that after Vatican 2 council mass attendance has dropped significantly.
- The fact that there were inner debates in the catholic church before nicaea council with opposition on the idea of eternal hell such as Origene is indeed a proof that catholic church imposed this view with the contradictory principle thus showing that the debate procedure was respected.


Conclusion.

Pro made a lot of contradiction. Stating bad people are dead in the afterlife yet resurrected for instance. You can see the problem when people want to do their own version of christianity and ignore the roman catholic church teaching.

Pro didn't answer my request about for instance the fact that other bible passage of Jesus teaching talks about an eternal punishment without refering to the contested word hell.

I will admit that I didn't argue back on pro Old scriptures reference since I find that new scriptures that are direct word of god has overwhelming evidence on the hell subject.

I will conclude by saying that even if hell doctrin is sometime hard to admit it is a point of faith that everybody should have. People that believe in hell are sometime criticized by people that say that they live in fear. But it makes me wonder who really lives in fear the one that admit a truth or someone that will make up a lot of excuses just to hide from it ?

Hell is a real place and everybody in this earth should do everything to avoid it. Believing in hell prevent you from sinning and that is a good thing.

Vote Con.

Pro gloria Dei.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by lilrose 3 years ago
lilrose
@BrotherGino- if you a real follower of Christ you would not use derogatory terms to address people who have a different opinion. As a bible reader, I have every right to express my opinion. It is sad that there are people like you who resort to name calling when you read something that is against want you believe. I suggest you read your bible with an open mind and pray for the holy spirit to open your eyes to the truth. I don't follow the crowd. I don't follow what is popular. I stand my ground-Hell is not a fiery place of torment.This debate is not about winning. Its about getting people to read a different opinion and think outside the box. God bless you because you need it .
Posted by BrotherGino 3 years ago
BrotherGino
Lilyrose, You are already losing this debate BAD!!! And you are COMPLETELY WRONG about Gehenna, double check your sources because you just committed a false assumption. And your second problem is that you are ignoring all the other scriptural teachings such as the Rich Man and Lazurus, or when Jesus "it will be MORE TOLERABLE for Sodom and Gamorrah on the day of judgment" (speaking of hell). "More tolerable " means there is varying levels of torment, NOT a grave or annilihation. Annilihation is complete victory using your logic and it is absurd, silly, for the blind, and only believed by silly people. If you ever decide to read the Bible for yourself (because its obvious you Don't), I promise you will change your mind of your position. God Bless!
Posted by lilrose 3 years ago
lilrose
@ Thoht - OK.

@Negotiate-Thanks. I must admit that fire has varied connotations throughout the bible.I agree with u on the fact that the false teaching of hell fire was a scare tactic . Scaring people into worshiping God is wrong. This unhealthy fear leads to a shipwrecked faith that isn't firmly grounded. As a result theres a huge decline in Ca"tholicism and in Christianity as a whole.
Posted by Negotiate 3 years ago
Negotiate
@lilrose
Great point made, to which I agree with. The Book of Revelations is symbolic in itself and I am afraid we misjudge how literal it is. Don't forget, however, that "fire" has a varying meaning throughout the Bible. In fact, fire has been represented as Light and the Holy Spirit- that is why the Zoroastrians cherish fire.

On the matter at hand, I believe that "Hell" has been shaped into this daunting monster of a concept through the acts and history of the Catholic Church- it appears, at least in my mind, to be propaganda and a scare tactic. This, I believe, has most certainly come in handy as we see that the Catholic Church, through the generous funds of frightened Christians, has built not only the Church but also the Catholic faith we see today.

"When in doubt, blame it on the Catholics," I say when talking about matters like this. Reason being that the Catholics have always been such powerful contributors to the Christian system of beliefs/values.
Posted by Thoht 3 years ago
Thoht
Are you looking for another Christian that believes in hell to debate this with? I assume so. It doesn't feel that me stepping in and saying Hell doesn't exist would be proper.
Posted by lilrose 3 years ago
lilrose
Revelation 20:4(King James Bible)- "....And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death".Revelation 21:8(King James Bible)".....shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."
we should not be hasty in taking this expression "lake of fire" as literal as is evident from the nature of the book of Revelation. The opening words of the book says -Revelation1:1"The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:....."
As stated, this revelation was signified; presented "in signs." The lake of fire symbolizes everlasting destruction.
Fire is often used to symbolize complete destruction.
Posted by Arganger 3 years ago
Arganger
What about the lake of burning sulfur
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.