Sheol/Hades is NOT a type of Purgatory. It is in the heart of the earth as revealed by Christ. The righteous dead were separated from the unrighteous dead by a great chasm ("a great gulf"), but the righteous dead were at peace in "Abraham's bosom". Hence the metaphor of "sleep". However the unrighteous dead were in torment as noted in the narrative of the Rich Man and Lazarus, and the rich man desired to CROSS OVER but that was not possible. After the resurrection of Christ the righteous dead were taken to Heaven, but the unrighteous remain in Hades until the final judgment which leads to Hell (the Lake of Fire).
Pope Francis: 'There Is No Hell'
- Thread starter Budman
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
MY understanding of purgatory is that the Catholic church believes it is a temporary holding place in the earth that burned off the sins of those who got sent there. I was just thinking that might be where they got the concept of purgatory.
The one side of this big hollow in the middle of the earth was called hell, but the other side Jesus called paradise.
Luk 23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
There were no flames or torments on the paradise side.
So you can't say the whole belly or heart of the earth was hades/hell. Only the part that had flames. The great gulf or unbridgeable chasm might have been something like the grand canyon, a very deep and wide trench. Abraham did not call it hell either.
So does anyone know where the Catholic church came up with purgatory from the scriptures?
The one side of this big hollow in the middle of the earth was called hell, but the other side Jesus called paradise.
Luk 23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
There were no flames or torments on the paradise side.
So you can't say the whole belly or heart of the earth was hades/hell. Only the part that had flames. The great gulf or unbridgeable chasm might have been something like the grand canyon, a very deep and wide trench. Abraham did not call it hell either.
So does anyone know where the Catholic church came up with purgatory from the scriptures?
The whole heart of the earth is called Hades. Please note:
Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell [hades], neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. (Acts 2:27).
This is a prophecy regarding the resurrection of Christ after three days and three nights in Hades. Christ was with the righteous dead.
2 Maccabees in the Apocrypha. Also by eisegesis with a few other Scriptures. See the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia.
Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell [hades], neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. (Acts 2:27).
This is a prophecy regarding the resurrection of Christ after three days and three nights in Hades. Christ was with the righteous dead.
2 Maccabees in the Apocrypha. Also by eisegesis with a few other Scriptures. See the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia.
Still ignorant as ever I see!
Saying "Holy, holy, Holy is the Lord God Almighty" day and night, is not the same as not having any rest day or night from torment in flame. Where do you get these idiotic comparisons from?
The other words in the context "the smoke of their torment rises up forever and ever and they have no rest day or night" demonstrates that the one experiencing said torment must be existing, conscious and aware.
Saying "Holy, holy, Holy is the Lord God Almighty" day and night, is not the same as not having any rest day or night from torment in flame. Where do you get these idiotic comparisons from?
The other words in the context "the smoke of their torment rises up forever and ever and they have no rest day or night" demonstrates that the one experiencing said torment must be existing, conscious and aware.
Well now they're saying he was "misquoted," which seems more like damage control to me...
Have you noticed a pattern. It seems whenever he says something that's not received well by the masses that they just blame the journalist, calling it a misquote. And this pope seems to be the most misquoted person, lol.
Journalists often lie and twist things to make money, but if he had truly been misquoted then why hasn't he confirmed what it was he actually said? I haven't seen any correction made.
It could be he was being a people pleaser and agreeing with this atheist (as atheists don't believe in hell), or maybe he does actually believe it. I think there was another article a while back where he said that atheists who do good are redeemed??!
"The Vatican issued a statement after the comments spread like wildfire on social media, saying the pope never granted the interview and the story was "the result of (the reporter's) reconstruction,” not a “faithful transcription of the words of the Holy Father."
Have you noticed a pattern. It seems whenever he says something that's not received well by the masses that they just blame the journalist, calling it a misquote. And this pope seems to be the most misquoted person, lol.
Journalists often lie and twist things to make money, but if he had truly been misquoted then why hasn't he confirmed what it was he actually said? I haven't seen any correction made.
It could be he was being a people pleaser and agreeing with this atheist (as atheists don't believe in hell), or maybe he does actually believe it. I think there was another article a while back where he said that atheists who do good are redeemed??!
"The Vatican issued a statement after the comments spread like wildfire on social media, saying the pope never granted the interview and the story was "the result of (the reporter's) reconstruction,” not a “faithful transcription of the words of the Holy Father."
Regardless whether or not this pope has been misquoted, there are more serious matters concerned. Someone may have to confirm this for me but is this Pope Francis more popular than John Paul II?
Regardless, this pope is extremely popular. He may appear clean and white, but in reality is not. And this popularity may make this pope the most dangerous man on the planet.
In these end times, we need to be careful. It is not a question of looking out for people who have devil horns, but rather people who appear all smiley face all the time but have a hidden darkness that can only be detected on a thorough spiritual analysis of said persons actions and words.
We are in big trouble today.
Regardless, this pope is extremely popular. He may appear clean and white, but in reality is not. And this popularity may make this pope the most dangerous man on the planet.
In these end times, we need to be careful. It is not a question of looking out for people who have devil horns, but rather people who appear all smiley face all the time but have a hidden darkness that can only be detected on a thorough spiritual analysis of said persons actions and words.
We are in big trouble today.
That is somewhat inaccurate, since most of the polls deal only with US Catholics, many of whom are Democrats. In any event, his popularity means nothing, since the real issues are generally ignored. But his statement about Hell have produced a backlash.
https://onepeterfive.com/after-rece...s-emerge-of-curial-backlash-against-the-pope/
https://onepeterfive.com/after-rece...s-emerge-of-curial-backlash-against-the-pope/
Maybe then since this "no hell" incident his popularity has somewhat gone down hill?
How about in comparison to all the previous popes? How popular and well liked is this pope compared to others before him?
Have to admit, never realize there was such a backlash.
Thing is, generally speaking, how much support does this pope have? Put aside this "no hell" incident for the moment, how many people on average still show their support to this pope? We don't know if this "no hell" speech incident may of been planned to see what the outcome be like. Or if this "no hell" speech may of been targeted to a select group of individuals to boost his support in a different way??
Nowadays, when events happen, I think it happens for a reason
How often has a pope been known as "a man of peace"? And yet the history of the papacy, especially dating back to the times of the inquisition says otherwise.
We do know many people around the world don't believe or won't accept a concept of hell. I think there are some that believe there is a heaven, but no hell, and there are some who just don't accept there is eternal life. And for these people who don't accept a concept of hell, it is most likely due to the mindset of this style of thinking "cannot think like that, that is negative thinking".
But what amazes me today, that even after all this time, people still see the pope (doesn't matter who is pope) as a man of peace. And this is what is to me most alarming. And I think this is what throughout the past is where the pope is most popular, has the appearance of being a man of peace. Doesn't matter what these popes say, popes come and go, but the illusion of the pope being a man of peace will always be there, and it is this illusion that is going to see many people deceived. And in my opinion, this is where the pope is most popular, as being presented as a man of peace. So many popes have been viewed in such a way.
How about in comparison to all the previous popes? How popular and well liked is this pope compared to others before him?
Have to admit, never realize there was such a backlash.
Thing is, generally speaking, how much support does this pope have? Put aside this "no hell" incident for the moment, how many people on average still show their support to this pope? We don't know if this "no hell" speech incident may of been planned to see what the outcome be like. Or if this "no hell" speech may of been targeted to a select group of individuals to boost his support in a different way??
Nowadays, when events happen, I think it happens for a reason
How often has a pope been known as "a man of peace"? And yet the history of the papacy, especially dating back to the times of the inquisition says otherwise.
We do know many people around the world don't believe or won't accept a concept of hell. I think there are some that believe there is a heaven, but no hell, and there are some who just don't accept there is eternal life. And for these people who don't accept a concept of hell, it is most likely due to the mindset of this style of thinking "cannot think like that, that is negative thinking".
But what amazes me today, that even after all this time, people still see the pope (doesn't matter who is pope) as a man of peace. And this is what is to me most alarming. And I think this is what throughout the past is where the pope is most popular, has the appearance of being a man of peace. Doesn't matter what these popes say, popes come and go, but the illusion of the pope being a man of peace will always be there, and it is this illusion that is going to see many people deceived. And in my opinion, this is where the pope is most popular, as being presented as a man of peace. So many popes have been viewed in such a way.
But what amazes me today, that even after all this time, people still see the pope (doesn't matter who is pope) as a man of peace. And this is what is to me most alarming. And I think this is what throughout the past is where the pope is most popular, has the appearance of being a man of peace. Doesn't matter what these popes say, popes come and go, but the illusion of the pope being a man of peace will always be there, and it is this illusion that is going to see many people deceived. And in my opinion, this is where the pope is most popular, as being presented as a man of peace. So many popes have been viewed in such a way.[/QUOTE]
I think the problem with Pope Francis is that he is trying to be inclusive with other religions.
I have read that he believes in the Devil, so he probably believes in Hell.
I read a few of the articles online and it sounds like he is saying Hell is not burning fire, but separation from God.
Also, he smiles and seems friendly and this may be a way of messing with people's minds. On the other hand, if he acted mean and nasty, we would also know.
I think the problem with Pope Francis is that he is trying to be inclusive with other religions.
I have read that he believes in the Devil, so he probably believes in Hell.
I read a few of the articles online and it sounds like he is saying Hell is not burning fire, but separation from God.
Also, he smiles and seems friendly and this may be a way of messing with people's minds. On the other hand, if he acted mean and nasty, we would also know.
Paradise was NEVER beneath the earth. Christ spoke in anticipation of all the righteous dead being in Paradise in the New Jerusalem the day He was resurrected. It was an accomplished fact before it actually occurred.
As to "Hell" increasing in size, that word is actually "Sheol" in Isa 5:14, which is the same as Hades. So it is Hades which metaphorically increases in size as more and more people enter Hades to await their final judgment. It is unfortunate that the KJV used "hell" for both regions.
As to "Hell" increasing in size, that word is actually "Sheol" in Isa 5:14, which is the same as Hades. So it is Hades which metaphorically increases in size as more and more people enter Hades to await their final judgment. It is unfortunate that the KJV used "hell" for both regions.
My understanding of this is that, because Jesus said "today you will be with me in paradise" and since after he died He had not yet ascended to the Father, I believe that when He told the man crucified next to him that he would be with him in paradise, that he was referring to their spirits going to the same place where Abraham, Lazarus and the rest of the OT saints were, which was referred to by Abraham as a place of comfort, i.e. paradise and was also under the earth. Therefore, because Jesus said "today you will be with me in paradise" that is the only place that their spirits could have gone. In support of this, remember that Jesus on the morning of the resurrection, Jesus told Mary not to hold on to him because he had not yet ascended to the Father.
That has always been my conclusion anyway.
That has always been my conclusion anyway.
