#1 Jesus on hell

[Wootah]

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?v ... 18%3A21-35

21 Then Peter came to Him and said, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?”

22 Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven. 23 Therefore the kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. 24 And when he had begun to settle accounts, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents. 25 But as he was not able to pay, his master commanded that he be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and that payment be made. 26 The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, ‘Master, have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’ 27 Then the master of that servant was moved with compassion, released him, and forgave him the debt.

28 “But that servant went out and found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii; and he laid hands on him and took him by the throat, saying, ‘Pay me what you owe!’ 29 So his fellow servant fell down [a]at his feet and begged him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’ 30 And he would not, but went and threw him into prison till he should pay the debt. 31 So when his fellow servants saw what had been done, they were very grieved, and came and told their master all that had been done. 32 Then his master, after he had called him, said to him, ‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you begged me. 33 Should you not also have had compassion on your fellow servant, just as I had pity on you?’ 34 And his master was angry, and delivered him to the torturers until he should pay all that was due to him.

35 “So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother [c]his trespasses.”

Jesus tells a parable where the master actually tortures the unforgiving servant until he pays all that was due to him and after the parable says God will do this to each of us if we do not forgive each other.

* You can't torture a dead person or an annihilated person, so we know we have to be alive to be tortured.
* We can't pay our debt against God so we know the punishment is eternal.

How is that not a judgement of hell that supports traditional doctrine?

[PinSeeker]

You obviously overlooked this verse:

28 “But that servant went out and found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii; and he laid hands on him and took him by the throat, saying, ‘Pay me what you owe!’

He clearly collected funds from other servants, unless of course you are suggesting that the bible is flawed in this case.

No, I didn't overlook it in any way. Do you see anything anywhere indicating he actually collected anything from anybody? No, and if you do, you are making an assumption of your own. The assumption itself clearly goes against the text, because the servant, upon not receiving the one hundred denari, threw his fellow servant into prison. The parable is about his refusal to show mercy and forgive the debt, which itself, by comparison is far, far less -- and actually repayable -- than the (unpayable, because of its magnitude) debt he himself owes the king, who initially forgave him.

And no, the Bible is "flawed" in any way. There is absolutely nothing to indicate that any other servant owed him any money, and thus nothing to warrant that assumption. You might say, "Yes there is; they were 'greatly distressed!'" Again, that's an assumption. If you were to say that, my answer would be, "They were distressed because they knew of the mercy of the king and were 'distressed' that their fellow servant was not merciful in the same way (even with a far smaller receivable), and also 'distressed' at the treatment of their (other) fellow servant," and that's consistent with the parable itself. Isn't it also just as possible that they were thinking, "Darn, I'm glad I (we) don't owe him anything..."?

I am addressing what the bible actually says.

To a large extent, yes, you are, but as demonstrated here, you are reading into it (which is not always a bad thing, but in this case, it is), and making unwarranted assumptions of your own.

Grace and peace to you.

[Tcg]

To a large extent, yes, you are, but as demonstrated here, you are reading into it (which is not always a bad thing, but in this case, it is), and making unwarranted assumptions of your own.

Nope. I'm reporting what it actually says. I've not presented any unwarranted assumptions. I've presented what the text itself states as factual. If you disagree with what the text states you'll need to take your argument to a different subforum. In this one what the text states is considered authoritative.


Tcg

[PinSeeker]

To a large extent, yes, you are, but as demonstrated here, you are reading into it (which is not always a bad thing, but in this case, it is), and making unwarranted assumptions of your own.

Nope.

Yep.

I'm reporting what it actually says.

Like I said, for the most part.

I've not presented any unwarranted assumptions.

You have.

I've presented what the text itself states as factual.

No, you've added to it with your own (unwarranted) assumptions.

If you disagree with what the text states you'll need to take your argument to a different subforum.

I don't disagree with what the text states in any way, so no need for me to take anything anywhere. The only thing I disagree with is your (unwarranted) additions to the text.

In this one what the text states is considered authoritative.

Yes, the text is absolutely authoritative, because the ultimate Author of it is absolutely authoritative; it's His Word. I'm glad we agree on that.

Grace and peace to you.

[Tcg]

I don't disagree with what the text states in any way, so no need for me to take anything anywhere.

Then why do you continue to deny what it clearly states?


Tcg

[PinSeeker]

I don't disagree with what the text states in any way, so no need for me to take anything anywhere.

Then why do you continue to deny what it clearly states?

I only deny what you think it clearly states but clearly does not.

Grace and peace to you.

[Tcg]

I don't disagree with what the text states in any way, so no need for me to take anything anywhere.

Then why do you continue to deny what it clearly states?

I only deny what you think it clearly states but clearly does not.

Grace and peace to you.

I've already quoted exactly what it states. It is undeniable.


Tcg

[PinSeeker]

I've already quoted exactly what it states.

But you added your own unwarranted assumptions to the text, as is clearly evident, beyond any shadow of a doubt.

It is undeniable.

No, but what I said above is undeniable. Well... it's deniable, but if what I say above is denied, it then becomes a clear falsehood (albeit possibly an inadvertent one).

Grace and peace to you.

[Tcg]

I've already quoted exactly what it states.

But you added your own unwarranted assumptions to the text, as is clearly evident, beyond any shadow of a doubt.

It is undeniable.

No, but what I said above is undeniable. Well... it's deniable, but if what I say above is denied, it then becomes a clear falsehood (albeit possibly an inadvertent one).

Grace and peace to you.

Wrong again. I quoted precisely what the text stated. You have yet to even attempt to address the text itself.


Tcg

[PinSeeker]

I've already quoted exactly what it states.

But you added your own unwarranted assumptions to the text, as is clearly evident, beyond any shadow of a doubt.

It is undeniable.

No, but what I said above is undeniable. Well... it's deniable, but if what I say above is denied, it then becomes a clear falsehood (albeit possibly an inadvertent one).

Grace and peace to you.

Wrong again.

Nope.

I quoted precisely what the text stated. You have yet to even attempt to address the text itself.

Your claim was that the servant clearly collected funds from other servants. I challenge you (yet again) to show me where it says that, or anything close to it, either implicitly or explicitly. You can't. Therefore, you are not quoting, in that instance, "precisely what the text stated," either implicitly or explicitly, or any facsimile thereof. It is, Tcg, an unwarranted assumption.

As for me addressing the text, I most certainly did. If you think not, or even if you think what I said insufficient in addressing the text, tell me where. Again, you can't.

But in both instances, I'll give you the chance to try. Fire away. This time without trying to put words in my mouth, please.

Grace and peace to you.

[Checkpoint]

... Can you pay for your sins against God?

I don’t think so. I don’t think anyone can pay for sin. But, I could get the wage of sin that is death.

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23
[/quote]

Good answer.

God makes this very clear in His word.

We cannot pay, but God can. This is what He did in Jesus Christ, paying for us death's wages, which is the ransom required to redeem us.

Psalm 89:48

Who can live and not see death, or who can escape the power of sheol?

Psalm 49:7-9,15

7 No one can redeem the life of another
or give to God a ransom for them—
8 the ransom for a life is so costly:
no payment is ever enough—
9 so that they should live on forever
and not see decay.

15 But God will redeem me from the hand of sheol;
He will surely take me to Himself.

Mark 10:45

"For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

1 Timothy 2:5-6

5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all—the testimony that was given at just the right time.

2 Corinthians 5:20-21

20 Therefore we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making His appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ: Be reconciled to God.

21 God made him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.