Do you believe in Hell?

CO:

Do you believe in hell?

WTOP asked it readers this, what do you think:  http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/03/24/fear-hell/#

Oh by the way, a pastor was expelled, seems he didn’t believe in hell, either, oops:  http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/03/24/fear-hell/#

James:

According to the bible Hell obviously exists (Mark 9:45); so, since I utterly believe everything that is stated in scripture, I believe in Hell.
Incidentally, hell itself is taken and tossed into a lake of fire where there is everlasting torment, this is then the final place for all unbelievers (Revelations 20:14). Also, there are different degrees of punishment in hell (Luke 10:12). Obviously people that don’t believe in hell also don’t believe in the bible to which I’m tempted to inquire how they account for whatever morality they profess or expect others to abide by.

Biblical instructions for doing Apologetics from 2 Timothy 2:25

The last thing that skeptics need is more evidence; what they really need is worldview surgery! A person’s worldview is the “lens” by which he/she will interpret any evidence presented. Many Christians spend their time arguing with unbelievers over the “evidence” perceived to be for or against their worldview. Is this how the bible informs us to carry out apologetics? Of course not (Colossians 2:8)! Does the fact that scientific studies of DNA seem to show that all men that have ever lived can be traced back to a single male and all women likewise to a single female, prove that the bible’s account of creation is true? NO.

The astute unbeliever is not ready to give up their worldview based on a single piece of seemingly damaging evidence; rather, the astute unbeliever will inevitably invoke a rescuing device. Perhaps all men do go back to one male, and all women to a single female but that doesn’t rule out the possibility that the male (called y-chromosome Adam) and the female (called mitochondrial eve) weren’t contemporaries. Perhaps, they were lone survivors of a larger group of people that existed back in pre-historic times etc.; therefore, this evidence does not necessarily prove the biblical account of origins provided in the bible’s book of Genesis. So what do you do now? More evidence is not the answer.

In 2 Timothy 2:24-25 (…the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, able to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth) we are told that biblical apologetics involves demonstrating to the unbeliever that their worldview is ultimately a contradictory one. Incidentally, there is no reason to think that Paul is only singling out a particular group of unbelievers. Any departure from scripture will ultimately lead to a contradiction since logic is a reflection of the way that the biblical God thinks and any ideas that do not coincide with biblical truth are thus antithetical to the way God thinks. Since the verse above defines “those that need repentance to the acknowledgement of the truth” as those that “contradict themselves”, we must conclude that the unbeliever is always transgressing the laws of logic when it comes to the worldview they profess.  In other words, when you perform an internal critique of the unbeliever’s worldview it will always lead to a contradiction; the only question is: how many contradictions will you find?

Paul demonstrates this technique when he delivered the gospel to the Athenian Epicurean and Stoic philosophers at Mars hill. Apparently, the Athenians were fond of idol worship and held the notion that the gods were graven idols of gold, silver and stone (Acts 17:29). They even had an altar with the inscription: “TO THE UNKNOWN GOD” which apparently was a devotion to the living God of the bible who they only knew in ignorance. As Paul is giving his presentation of the biblical God, he quotes a saying from one of their poets in order to demonstrate a contradiction in their worldview. What was the contradiction? The Athenian poet claimed (in regards to the “UNKNOWN GOD” of the bible Who lives) “for we are also His offspring” yet the Athenians simultaneously held the view that their gods were tangible entities (i.e. statues made from lifeless material). How could they be the offspring of man-made statues of stone, silver or gold? Secondly, they used their hands to create and worship their gods,  but Paul points out that the “UNKNOWN GOD” of the bible Who exclusively created all things is neither created nor worshiped with men’s hands.
Paul exposes these contradictions to them in order to demonstrate that their worldview had some serious problems. As a result of Paul’s apologetic method, we are told that God gave some of the Athenians repentance to the acknowledgement of the Truth (Acts 17:34).

One of the most common contradictions unbelievers employ is their insistence on using biblical standards and presuppositions in order to mount an attack on the bible. If you (as an unbeliever) do not believe that the biblical God exists then stop using His standard of goodness or evil to present an argument against Him. Come up with your own standards based on your Godless worldview. If you disbelieve in the biblical God then stop trying to use logic to construct an argument against Him. The laws of logic have no basis outside of the biblical worldview but especially in an atheistic worldview where typically matter is all there is. After all, can the immaterial laws of logic be detected using any scientific method or apparatus? Why should a law of logic in my mind that I adhere to (i.e. the law of non-contradiction) conform to a law in your mind since we are each composed of different matter and have different chemical reactions? Is scholarship as we know it even possible in a logic-less (and thus God-less) worldview. Again, don’t appeal to the bible’s code of moral conduct when accusing the biblical God of being unkind, uncaring or evil; if the biblical God does not exist then why on earth is it wrong for a person to dash infants into pieces just for sport (especially if doing so benefits that persons perceived survival value)? In summary, if you’re an unbeliever and can follow the preceding lines of argument, then you have been found guilty of using the laws of logic to comprehend and consume this information. You should now either switch sides or refrain from stealing presuppositions from the biblical worldview. On the other hand, outside of the biblical worldview, ultimately, there is nothing wrong with stealing; so carry on.

It is always the case that the unbeliever has no rational defense for their position and must utilize biblical presuppositions to present arguments against the bible.  So the next time someone accuses the bible of having contradictions, before trying to explain or clarify what is probably a misunderstanding of one or more biblical passages (i.e. what they perceive to be a contradiction is not really a contradiction), consider using the following reply: Why it is wrong to embrace ideas that contain contradictions since in a Godless worldview it is impossible to account for the laws of logic? Their response (if any) will ultimately betray their crutch to be something that we call the biblical worldview.

Re: Pope Forgives Jews for Killing Jesus

CO:

Nice guy.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03/02/pope-exonerates-jews-jesus-death-new-book/?test=latestnews#

James:

I apologize in advance (if I hurt the feelings of any of my catholic friends) as the following email is very candid but ultimately in love.

The Pope doesn’t have to ‘exonorate’ the Jews for killing Jesus since the death of Christ was planned by God before the foundation of the world (Revelations 13:8) and the group of Jews that hated Jesus themselves acknowledge that they were responsible for His death (Matthew 27:24-45, 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15).

However, (and tangentially) the Catholic Church should apologize for putting Mussolini, Hitler and many more horrendous leaders into power and being responsible for killing more Christians than any other institution on the face of the earth (massacred Christians include but are not limited to: Huguenots, Albigenses, Bogomils, Brethren, Cathari, Hussites, Vaudois, Waldenses, St Bartholomew’s Massacre in France, victims of the inquisition etc).

The damage that the CC has done over the years is a lot worse than many people think. The CC was actually against the 1948 re-nationalization of Israel even though this event was prophesied in scripture (Amos 9:14-15, Jeremiah 16:14-15). This is probably due in part to the fact that the Catholic church thinks that they have replaced Israel as God’s chosen people; in fact, they took the names that God gave to Jerusalem (i.e. The city of God, the Holy city, the Eternal City) and instead applied these names to Vatican city (we can thank St. Augustine for some of these contributions to ‘Replacement Theology’). 

They have produced more child molesters than any institution on the face of the earth forcing them to fork over 1 billion+ in out of court settlements for permanently damaging the lives of countless unsuspecting victims. The bible calls the Catholic Church “the mother of harlots.” What else would you expect as a title for an institution that has single-handedly empowered and sustained the brothel industry by it’s unbiblical rule of mandatory celibacy for its priests.

My boy, MB wants me to demonstrate why I thought that the Mormons were not nearly as bad as the Catholics to which my reply is:

It is not even a competition, granted the Mormons also spew heresy (eg. the Mormons say that Jesus and Satan are brothers while the Catholics Supreme Pontiff is actually Satan masquerading as Jesus) and also rely on extra-biblical material, but the only violence from the Mormons I can think of that merits mentioning is the Mountain Meadows Massacre of 120 men, women and children by the Mormon militiamen and Paiute Indians on Sept. 11, 1857.

On the other hand, what I have mentioned above regarding the Catholic Church probably constitutes less than 10% of the evils perpetrated by that institution (I came up with this figure based upon the shear number of atrocities that I am solidly familiar with). I mean, the Mormons don’t have Popes that:

 (1) claimed they were God, (2) toasted Satan, (3) were murdered in bed by their mistress’ angry husband who caught them in the act – this happen to at least two different Popes, (4) put six other Popes into power under the influence of a mother and daughter harlot team, (5) produced fraudulent documents and forgeries for the purpose of acquiring filthy lucre, (6) raped women visiting St. Peter’s, (7) ran a harem in St. Peters Palace, (8) blinded and murdered friends and foes, (9) deposed and installed emperors throughout history or (10) that died in the Papal bedroom while being sodomized by a male page.

I only stopped at ten because I don’t have anymore time to spend on this rsponse. All the claims that I have made above concerning the CC have their basis in hundreds of historical accounts that provide details concerning these atrocities. Among my favorites are: A Woman Rides the Beast by Dave Hunt, Papal Power: Its Origins and Development by Henry T. Hudson, Ecclesiastical Megalomania: The Economic and Political Thought of the Roman Catholic Church by Dr. John Robbins (I have all of these books if anyone is interested in reading, I even have some on audio book); even the Catholic Encyclopedia also contains details of these monstrosities. Another good source is the Patrina Logia (Writings of the Church Fathers) or the following website: http://www.thebereancall.org.

A common reply to these accusations (usually by Catholic apologists) is to suggest that all this behavior is comparable to the biblical King Solomon having hundreds of wives and mistresses, but this reply is just silly. Sin is still sin, God warned Solomon not to have more than one wife (Deut 17:17) but he decided that he would disobey God to his own demise. Likewise, the collective sins of the popes and the church will lead to the destruction of this vile vessel of Satan that claims to hold the only road to salvation, contrary to what we find in scripture (Titus 3:4-5).

As God promises to destroy the Catholic Church in Revelation 17, the Pope and his church are definitely in for it. All I can do is echo the same cry that Christ had for the poor souls that are unlucky enough to call themselves Catholics; Come out from her (the Catholic Church), my people, so that you do not be partakers of her sins and her punishment (Revelations 18:4).

Incidentally, I just finished reading an excellent article entitled: “Israel and Prophetic Proof Part 1” (http://www.thebereancall.org/node/7745) and I highly recommend this article!