International Fellowship of Christians and Jews

[Cow Poke]

I am merely responding to your posts on this topic. Cease posting about this and so will I.

You first.

[Sparko]

Protestants do not accept transubstantiation. Protestants do not recognise Mary’s perpetual virginity. The Coptic Christians differ over beliefs surrounding the human and divine nature of the Son. Some Protestant sects do not recognise infant baptism. Protestants do not accept the belief in Purgatory nor the veneration of saints and their intercessory abilities. Unitarians do not accept the Trinity.

Given those brief present day examples it is quite clear that Christianity has no “consensus” and nor has it been taught for “the last 2000+ years”. The first two and a half centuries [approximately from the writings of Paul in the 50s CE until the Edict of Milan in 313 CE] the Christian religion was entirely fluid. Different Christian groups believed different things and argued against one another's beliefs.

Reading Genesis is not going to suddenly provide me with enlightenment.

Furthermore the Christian interpretation of Genesis 3 is somewhat different from that of Judaism. The notion of original sin being passed on through the generations does not exist in Judaism.

How so? The Christian god is believed to be omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent [and even omnipresent].

Of course it does if I am critically assessing it. Nor am I attempting to convince you of anything. I am simply pointing that your belief that your theology in some way dates back to around 33 CE is erroneous. The things you now believe are the result of theological developments that took place over hundreds of years. The opposition to abortion among some Christians for example has no scriptural basis. There is nothing in the Hebrew texts that forbids abortion and in the four canonical gospels Jesus is silent on that topic.

LOL.

I said "core" doctrines. The essentials. You bring up mostly side issues that we disagree on. The Trinity is the only core doctrine you have mentioned. The core doctrines are what define orthodox Christianity, the side issues do not.

But again, your description of God is incorrect. You leave out characteristics like Justice. And no he is not "omnibenevolent" whatever that is supposed to mean.

[Cow Poke]

LOL.

I said "core" doctrines. The essentials. You bring up mostly side issues that we disagree on. The Trinity is the only core doctrine you have mentioned. The core doctrines are what define orthodox Christianity, the side issues do not.

But again, your description of God is incorrect. You leave out characteristics like Justice. And no he is not "omnibenevolent" whatever that is supposed to mean.

It's "the nice God" who would "never send anybody to Hell".

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

It's "the nice God" who would "never send anybody to Hell".

What is your version of hell?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

LOL.

I said "core" doctrines. The essentials. You bring up mostly side issues that we disagree on. The Trinity is the only core doctrine you have mentioned. The core doctrines are what define orthodox Christianity, the side issues do not.

But again, your description of God is incorrect. You leave out characteristics like Justice. And no he is not "omnibenevolent" whatever that is supposed to mean.

That comment merely demonstrates your ignorance. Beliefs and doctrines considered de fide are hardly "side issues". Indeed members of your religion have spent many happy years slaughtering one another over such trivialities.

[Cow Poke]

What is your version of hell?

I don't have a version. That's FAR above my pay grade.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I don't have a version. That's FAR above my pay grade.

Don't tell me you have actual photographs?

In all seriousness there are various versions of what people call hell. There is the classic Christian take on it complete with a lake of fire and demons doing unmentionable things to the damned with pitchforks.

There is Inferno as Dante perceives it in The Divine Comedy.

There is the belief that it is a total rejection by the deity where those who go there will never see the face of their god or experience its love.

I even once heard it posited that for the truly and irredeemably wicked would not heaven actually be hell?

There is the belief in Sheol and Hades which are not really hell but simply where the dead go.

There is the Norse Hel or Niflheim again where the dead go [apart from warriors dying battle].

And those are just a few.

So what is your take on it?

[Cow Poke]

Don't tell me you have actual photographs?

In all seriousness there are various versions of what people call hell. There is the classic Christian take on it complete with a lake of fire and demons doing unmentionable things to the damned with pitchforks.

There is Inferno as Dante perceives it in The Divine Comedy.

There is the belief that it is a total rejection by the deity where those who go there will never see the face of their god or experience its love.

I even once heard it posited that for the truly and irredeemably wicked would not heaven actually be hell?

There is the belief in Sheol and Hades which are not really hell but simply where the dead go.

There is the Norse Hel or Niflheim again where the dead go [apart from warriors dying battle].

And those are just a few.

So what is your take on it?

I'm not even remotely interested in a discussion on hell.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I'm not even remotely interested in a discussion on hell.

Fair enough.