This is really a reply to comments in response to my mentioning that a couple I knew was kicked out of a Bible study for considering the idea that hell is not eternal. That discussion was in this thread:
viewthread.php?tid=1754&page=1
The post I am referring to is best exemplified by:
"That's kind of scary, really. I don't consider myself any kind of bible-thumper, but there's something inherently wrong with a "buffet style religion" (i.e. take what you want and conveniently ignore the rest). That goes against the very basis of any religion. It's one thing to disagree on minor procedural points , like whether you can or cannot eat fish during a fast. It's another to disagree on main points, and the concept of Hell is indeed a major point. Usually that kind of disagreement is considered "heresy". I mean no offense, Ackety-Bamf, but it's no WONDER your friends got kicked out of their bible study group for views as radically different as that. "
In defense of that couple; I have to say that they don't consider Christianity a "buffet style religion" either; they were just going with a different interpretation of what the Bible says. Consider that may Christians differ on some points of interpretation (e.g. whether baptism requires dunking or sprinkling, whether the Pope is the one who does the authoritative interpreting of the Bible, etc...). These differing interpretations are responsible for all the different branches of Christianity.
The different interpretation includes things like viewing the phrase about the eternally consuming flame of hell as saying that it is the consuming fire that is eternal, not eternal souls that are consumed. Also; salvation is often referred to as eternal life, isn't it; suggesting that not everyone gets eternal life?
The couple have said that the idea of everyone getting an eternal soul that either goes to heaven or hell is more a Greek concent that got incorporated into Christianity (along with the idea of eternal suffering-remember the fellow in Greek mythology that has to keep rolling the boulder up a hill or the fellow that is chained to a wall with fruit and water that would satisify his thirst and hunger just out of reach).
I believe I can come up with more examples or explanations of this couple's alternate interpretation if anyone is interested...
Variety in Christianity
Variety in Christianity
There's certain topics we can consider they very delicate, like sexual prefferences, sex, politics and religion, because every body has a unique perspective in those and not everybody has the capability of following the debate without feeling offended or upset, i guess we should be really analitic and open minded because everybody express very personal and indivitualistic points of view.
I think that if you wanted to continue with this discussion you should do it in the thread it was originally discussed, there's no need in starting a new thread.
I think that if you wanted to continue with this discussion you should do it in the thread it was originally discussed, there's no need in starting a new thread.