NT Writers

[POI]

For the context of this discussion, let's roll with the definition of faith to mean -- "to trust in, or to apply hope in anyways, despite inference(s) to the contrary. " Since belief does not seem to be a choice, as I cannot simply chose to believe in fairies without proper demonstration, the term faith looks to be the work-around.

Further, many will also argue faith in Jesus is necessary, because all humans fall short. But if this is THE case, then 'morals' also look to become superfluous and/or irrelevant. Which then looks to be contradictory and/or illogical, as the NT expresses the need to follow a certain 'moral' code....

For debate: Were the NT writer(s) savvy enough to recognize that many would read this collection of writings and not believe -- (due to contradiction and/or illogic)? Hence, the workaround term faith was implemented?

[Difflugia]

Shows only how some modern people think it was. No real information how the ancient people understood it.

Even if you don't agree with their conclusion, it's based on a pretty sizable mound of evidence. You didn't say that the evidence was misleading or something, you said that there was "no evidence."

Sorry, that shows only lack of understanding of the forces needed.

If you actually read the Wikipedia page, that might begin to remedy your "lack of understanding of the forces needed." I might have been assuming too much by just giving you the link and expecting you to take it from there yourself, but what that article would tell you is that convection within the mantle is driven by a combination of primordial heat within the Earth coupled with heat generated by radioactive decay. This convection moves parts of the crust that sit atop the mantle. The mechanism is pretty straightforward and matches our data.

In Bible the eternal fire lake (=hell) is called the torment. So, in Biblical point of view, torment means fire that burns. And because eternal life is promised only for righteous. and the hell is a place where soul and body are destroyed, I think it is not reasonable to say that the torment in the Bible means conscious eternal suffering for the ones who end up in it.

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Matt. 25:46

That doesn't equate hell with torment. The thing that "these will go away into" isn't torment (βασανισμός), but punishment (κόλασις). Even if you're claiming that the place where the punishment occurs is being called "punishment" as an epithet, the word "torment" isn't anywhere in view here.

Don’t be afraid of those who kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul. Rather, fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna [hell].
Matt. 10:28

This doesn't say what you want it to, either. Since this verse doesn't refer to torment, either, using it to change the definition of the word "torment" is pretty far-fetched.

[1213]

Shows only how some modern people think it was. No real information how the ancient people understood it.

Even if you don't agree with their conclusion, it's based on a pretty sizable mound of evidence. You didn't say that the evidence was misleading or something, you said that there was "no evidence."

Yes, I think still no evidence for that the Bible writers thought the way modern people think.

If you actually read the Wikipedia page, that might begin to remedy your "lack of understanding of the forces needed." I might have been assuming too much by just giving you the link and expecting you to take it from there yourself, but what that article would tell you is that convection within the mantle is driven by a combination of primordial heat within the Earth coupled with heat generated by radioactive decay. This convection moves parts of the crust that sit atop the mantle. The mechanism is pretty straightforward and matches our data.

May be surprising, but I have actually been in science oriented schools, and I have also heard these same claims from atheists often. The problem still is, if all they say is true about the structure of earth, everything would level down, similarly as concrete in this video:



I understand that the convection could in theory move continents. But rising mountains up needs a great force. And the current theory doesn't really give any reasonable force to do it. To me the idea that crust is many times lighter in the area of Mount Everest than in ocean floor is irrational and goes against what is known about rocks. That is why I think the modern plate tectonics theory is irrational pseudoscience that ignores basic laws of physics.

In Bible the eternal fire lake (=hell) is called the torment. So, in Biblical point of view, torment means fire that burns. And because eternal life is promised only for righteous. and the hell is a place where soul and body are destroyed, I think it is not reasonable to say that the torment in the Bible means conscious eternal suffering for the ones who end up in it.

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Matt. 25:46

That doesn't equate hell with torment. The thing that "these will go away into" isn't torment (βασανισμός), but punishment (κόλασις). Even if you're claiming that the place where the punishment occurs is being called "punishment" as an epithet, the word "torment" isn't anywhere in view here.
...

The word torment comes for example from here:

The smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever. ...
Rev. 14:11

The "hell" is the fire lake, and smoke of that fire goes up forever. And the fire is called the torment in that.

[1213]

....The author states they need to go higher, to see all nations. ..

The Author doesn't say they needed to go higher to see the nations. He only tells they went to a high mountain.

That is almost funny. Romans 3:21-26 doesn't say faith=righteousness, as everyone can see, if reads the text:

But now apart from the law, a righteousness of God has been revealed, being testified by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ to all and on all those who believe. For there is no distinction, for all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God; being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus; whom God set forth to be an atoning sacrifice{or, a propitiation}, through faith in his blood, for a demonstration of his righteousness through the passing over of prior sins, in God's forbearance; to demonstrate his righteousness at this present time; that he might himself be just, and the justifier of him who has faith in Jesus.
Romans 3:21-26

It's clear, you are deemed 'righteous' by having 'Jesus-faith'. You cannot obtain 'righteousness' any other way. It's 'Jesus-faith', and nothing more.

If one can be counted righteous, if he has faith in Jesus, it doesn't mean there can be no other way.

My point here is that such an argument would not be placed forth if actual evidence was there to instead convince you that it is real. Hence, the reason NT writers propped up blind-faith and fear of 'hell'.

Yes, that is your argument. And I think it is just baseless speculation. I don't think NT writers propped up blind-faith and fear of 'hell'. You may fear hell, but I don't think it is reasonable and I don't think the idea in Bible is to make people fear. It is said that cowards go to hell.

But for the cowardly, unbelieving, sinners, abominable, murder-ers, sexually immoral, sorcerers,{The word for "sorcerers" here also includes users of potions and drugs.} idolaters, and all liars, their part is in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death."
Rev. 21:8
There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear has punishment. He who fears is not made perfect in love.
1 John 4:18

As Yoda says: "Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering."

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to 1213 in post #42]

The fire is torment because the unworthy are put in it, conscious and able to feel pain, otherwise there is no point in warnings. I do hope that you are not going to pretend it is just casual information and what God will actually do to the unworthy is make them unconcious and unable to feel anything.

And what is that about force to move mountains? Tectonic plate movement IS the force that moves mountains. The theory is not invalidated by your failure to understand it.Quite apart from the absurd analogy of concrete impacting machinery. Tectonic plate theory has no force supposedly Thumping the mountains down. Just gravity through erosion.

Bible - based YE fundamentalist science - denial really does seem to have little understanding of the mechanics involved, but just does 'that looks vaguely like [Replying to 1213 in post #43]


Brutally bad. I'll look up the elevation into space - which I'm sure was discussed before.

You are right in that Matthew only has Jesus taken up a mountain (also Luke 4) not into space, but the point is only in a flat earth could one expect to see all the nations of the earth Of course, it doesn't show the earth IS flat but only that the writers thought it was, and surely they thought it was when

As to fear of hell, your twisting would offend JD Vance.

atheists do not fear hell any more than we fear Godzilla. Ut is Christians, on their own report, who fear Hell. Love casting out fear refers, I rather think, to the idea that one should be ready to die for the faith. Better than being a coward, denying Christ and going to hell.

Matthew 10:28 King James Version (KJV)
And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

What you think makes no odds, only what you can show, and fiddled Biblequotes shows no case.
'. Eg, tring o argue that fossilisation can happen in mere decades because of limestone covering of modern objects. Calcification being unlike fossilisation.

[POI]

The Author doesn't say they needed to go higher to see the nations. He only tells they went to a high mountain.

He 'took him up to a high mountain to see ALL the kingdoms of the world.'. Even under your science-denial position, you also believe the continents spread out after a 'flood.' When "Matthew" was written, the continents were already "spread out". Going to a higher mountain yields pointless to see ALL kingdoms. Clearly, the author was under the impression the earth was a flat disk, and not spherical. This presents as a large FAIL for the Bible writer here. Unless you wish to extend your science-denial even further, and become a "flat-earther"?

If one can be counted righteous, if he has faith in Jesus, it doesn't mean there can be no other way.

Romans 3 lists THE way. Jesus-faith. No caveats are listed in Romans 3. Romans 3 tells the reader we all fall short. Jesus-faith is our only refuge.

Above, you finally agree Romans 3 tells the reader that 'righteousness' ='s 'Jesus-faith.' Thanks. And according to Romans 3, no other way can be obtained. Why?

"22 This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe."

Also

"23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."

Also

"25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. "

Also

"26 he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus."

Yes, that is your argument. And I think it is just baseless speculation. I don't think NT writers propped up blind-faith and fear of 'hell'.

Then you'd be wrong. The NT mentions the need for "faith" and "eternal torment" 100 times and counting:

https://www.openbible.info/topics/faith

https://www.openbible.info/topics/eternal_torment

********************

If the Bible ain't propping up these two concepts, then why mention them over 100 times each?

You may fear hell, but I don't think it is reasonable

I fear 'hell' like I fear the 'Boogie man'. Faith and eternal torment are both figments of the human imagination and invented by NT writers. But indoctrination, by way of repetition, is a real thing for many. The Bible mentions faith and torment many times. And if one is truly indoctrinated into this junk, they will fear eternal torment, as it is mentioned all over this collection of books. Hence, the concept of Pascal's Wager lives on strong, as the NT writers are aware to believe this stuff, BLIND FAITH is needed/required.

As Yoda says: "Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering."

Yes, and this 'quote' is also a figment of human imagination. Unless you also believe Yoda really exists and really gave this advice too?

[Difflugia]

Yes, I think still no evidence for that the Bible writers thought the way modern people think.

Then you're not using the word "evidence" the same way everyone else does.

May be surprising, but I have actually been in science oriented schools, and I have also heard these same claims from atheists often.

You mean your teachers? You heard these claims from your teachers?

The problem still is, if all they say is true about the structure of earth, everything would level down, similarly as concrete in this video:

What do you mean by "level down?" The crust would sink into the mantle or something? The crust is less dense than the mantle.

I understand that the convection could in theory move continents. But rising mountains up needs a great force. And the current theory doesn't really give any reasonable force to do it.

Show your work, then.

According to Google, the mass of the Earth's crust is 2.77×10²² kg and the mass of the mantle is 4.01×10²⁴ kg. That means that the mass of the crust is only 7% that of the mantle. But maybe math is pseudoscience, too.

To me the idea that crust is many times lighter in the area of Mount Everest than in ocean floor is irrational and goes against what is known about rocks. That is why I think the modern plate tectonics theory is irrational pseudoscience that ignores basic laws of physics.

From Encyclopedia Britannica:

Continental crust is broadly granitic in composition and, with a density of about 2.7 grams per cubic cm, is somewhat lighter than oceanic crust, which is basaltic (i.e., richer in iron and magnesium than granite) in composition and has a density of about 2.9 to 3 grams per cubic cm.

Those kooky, atheistic teachers!

The word torment comes for example from here:

The smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever. ...
Rev. 14:11

The "hell" is the fire lake, and smoke of that fire goes up forever. And the fire is called the torment in that.

The fire is the method of torment, not the torment itself. Burning a witch at the stake is torture. Just burning the stake is a bonfire.

[Difflugia]

And the fire is called the torment in that.

This is wrong for another reason. It occurred to me that the Greek noun in Revelation 14:11 has the wrong construction to mean either the torturer or the instrument of torture, so couldn't refer to the fire. The word is βασανισμός (basanismos). When the ending –μος is used to create a noun from a verb, it generally refers to the action of the verb itself, in this case, βασανίζω (basanizo). If the verse were referring to the fire as the instrument of torture, it would metaphorically be referred to as the βάσανος (basanos), which literally means "touchstone," from which the verb above was derived. A torturer is a βασανιστής (basanistes).

For anyone that cares to examine this more closely, see BDF § 109 or Goodell §§ 405-408.

[1213]

And the fire is called the torment in that.

This is wrong for another reason. It occurred to me that the Greek noun in Revelation 14:11 has the wrong construction to mean either the torturer or the instrument of torture, so couldn't refer to the fire. The word is βασανισμός (basanismos). When the ending –μος is used to create a noun from a verb, it generally refers to the action of the verb itself, in this case, βασανίζω (basanizo). If the verse were referring to the fire as the instrument of torture, it would metaphorically be referred to as the βάσανος (basanos), which literally means "touchstone," from which the verb above was derived. A torturer is a βασανιστής (basanistes).

Sorry, in this case I think that is not useful, because clearly the fire is called torment. And then it logically means tormenting means burning.

[1213]

What do you mean by "level down?" The crust would sink into the mantle or something? The crust is less dense than the mantle.
....
From Encyclopedia Britannica:

Continental crust is broadly granitic in composition and, with a density of about 2.7 grams per cubic cm, is somewhat lighter than oceanic crust, which is basaltic (i.e., richer in iron and magnesium than granite) in composition and has a density of about 2.9 to 3 grams per cubic cm.

...

I meant, if the continental crust is not much lighter than oceanic crust. As you show, the difference is small in different crusts.

That means, if the ocean crust is for example 10 mil thick, as it is claimed to be in some areas, and continental crust is about 30 mil think, the continental crust is about 3 times heavier, because much thicker. For to prevent the surface of the earth to level up, there must be a force that can prevents that. And that force would be the weight difference. In this case 30-10 = 20 mil thick layer of rock, which weights about 8640000 kg/m². To raise that weight one would need 864 MPa force, which probably means nothing to you. Luckily the important question works, even if you don't understand the weight of the matter. So, how do you explain, if there would be such a force, why it is not lifting the much lighter crust? It must be magic.

The word torment comes for example from here:

The smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever. ...
Rev. 14:11

The "hell" is the fire lake, and smoke of that fire goes up forever. And the fire is called the torment in that.

The fire is the method of torment, not the torment itself. Burning a witch at the stake is torture. Just burning the stake is a bonfire.

By what I see, the scripture calls the fire the torment.

[1213]

The Author doesn't say they needed to go higher to see the nations. He only tells they went to a high mountain.

He 'took him up to a high mountain to see ALL the kingdoms of the world.'. Even under your science-denial position, you also believe the continents spread out after a 'flood.' When "Matthew" was written, the continents were already "spread out". Going to a higher mountain yields pointless to see ALL kingdoms. Clearly, the author was under the impression the earth was a flat disk, and not spherical. This presents as a large FAIL for the Bible writer here. Unless you wish to extend your science-denial even further, and become a "flat-earther"?

It is funny how science has become like a religion. I think it is possible that earth is not flat. But in this case it doesn't matter what I believe. The scripture doesn't say earth is flat. It also doesn't say one must be on a high mountain to see all the kingdoms. I don't think there is enough reason to make the interpretation that it means earth is flat.

Romans 3 lists THE way. Jesus-faith. No caveats are listed in Romans 3. Romans 3 tells the reader we all fall short. Jesus-faith is our only refuge.

Above, you finally agree Romans 3 tells the reader that 'righteousness' ='s 'Jesus-faith.' Thanks. And according to Romans 3, no other way can be obtained. Why?

"22 This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe."

Also

"23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."

Also

"25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. "

Also

"26 he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus."

Those scriptures show, if one has faith, it can be counted for righteousness. Those don't say it is the only refugee.

I fear 'hell' like I fear the 'Boogie man'. Faith and eternal torment are both figments of the human imagination and invented by NT writers. But indoctrination, by way of repetition, is a real thing for many. The Bible mentions faith and torment many times. And if one is truly indoctrinated into this junk, they will fear eternal torment,....

If one fears, it is sad, because:

There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear has punishment. He who fears is not made perfect in love.
1 John 4:18

Yes, and this 'quote' is also a figment of human imagination. Unless you also believe Yoda really exists and really gave this advice too?

I think it is well said. But, maybe it should be credited to George Lucas.