Debate Tomorrow

[jpholding]

I thought you didn't do debates.

I tried that one as an experiment. It confirmed most of my reservations about them.

I also debated Carrier so that my wife could visit an elderly uncle in the same area. I'd need a serious reason like that to set aside my reservations again.

[Apologiaphoenix]

He might do one on my show.

[jpholding]

Given that it would be more like a discussion, given the terms, I can also live with that.

[KingsGambit]

I also heard a rumor that AP's show will be hosting a debate among Christians about hell soon.

[ChaosRain]

I also heard a rumor that AP's show will be hosting a debate among Christians about hell soon.

I imagine that'll be fun. Literal burning hell versus spiritual agony hell. Sounds like an extreme waste of time to me, but hey, at least it'll be entertaining for those involved.

[jpholding]

I imagine that'll be fun. Literal burning hell versus spiritual agony hell.

Nope. Neither one. Try again.

[ChaosRain]

Nope. Neither one. Try again.

Add in any extra possibilities, then. It's all the same to me.

[Apologiaphoenix]

No. More an eternal conscious torment vs annihliation.

[KingsGambit]

Add in any extra possibilities, then. It's all the same to me.

The other view is that the punishment eventually ends in non-existence (which I think is significantly different from the traditional view.)

(I actually was one of the people who was looking at participating, but it looks like I have to work that day so I had to pass.)

[jpholding]

Add in any extra possibilities, then. It's all the same to me.

That testifies to a remarkable simplicity of mind, but little else.

[JohnnyP]

No. More an eternal conscious torment vs annihliation.

It usually goes something like this:

Annihilationist: This shows annihilation, the unrighteous aren't suffering, neither are loved ones who may mourn for them:

Ecclesiastes 9:5 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.

Revelation 21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

ECT: Ecclesiastes is just talking about regular death and no more reward on earth like cheeseburgers and stuff, and those saved will understand that their loved ones are burning forever in agony!

Annihilationist: So we don't have memory of the first man Adam?

ECT: He was a famous guy it's just talking about most of the dead!

Annihilationist: What about the Rich Man, he wasn't in the Lake of Fire yet. Couldn't many of the passages of fire be about a purgatory?

ECT: Jesus just made that story up, it wasn't about a real situation! There is no purgatory, that's Catholic! Besides the Bible says the smoke of their torment rises forever and the fire is never quenched and the worm never dies and all that stuff!

Annihilationist: Which is just a way of saying, once they don't exist, they won't ever exist again. What purpose does it serve for them to exist?

ECT: Who are you to question what God wants!

I can't wait.

[Wilkowsky]

Where can I find the debate? Is it avaible?

[Apologiaphoenix]

I'll post a link when it is up.

[ChaosRain]

That testifies to a remarkable simplicity of mind, but little else.

Or merely understanding the empirical lack of evidence for the existence of either Heaven or Hell; let alone the Christian god.

[KingsGambit]

Or merely understanding the empirical lack of evidence for the existence of either Heaven or Hell; let alone the Christian god.

Generally, such Christian theological debates presuppose the Christian worldview. They're about whether the Bible teaches one stance or the other. Focusing on whether Christianity is true or not just isn't the point of those particular debates.