What happens to the wicked upon death?

[Rigon]

As an addendum, Rigon, Sana8410,BADecker and others who post on my topic I no doubt disagree about many political topics, and even on this one.  But, the central point of scripture is the risen Jesus.

I have no personal stake in the discussion of your superstitious beliefs. But on the other hand, if you people can prove your beliefs valid, then I would be very interested. It certainly would become personal if your beliefs are true.
My point is for you people at prove to yourselves that your beliefs are NOT superstitious. If you don't care, neither do I.

[sana8410]

For those who have faith in the risen Jesus, we have all eternity to discuss such things.  Although, no doubt Jesus himself will generally be our focal point.  Its going to be awesome, hard, at least for me, to even begin to picture.

Looking over this thread i noticed my own points get some what confusing, but i think the main point is clear. I think the Bible builds a much better foundation on ultimately annihilating the wicked and the points for eternal torment couched in parabolic language and misinterpreted. Its the 1000 year rein that had me confused, the first resurrection which involves fire also, and the resurrection of the saved isn't the end finally. After the 1000 is the real end and fire involved again which devours satan and everything and everybody. I was confusing the 2, if there is a 1000 year rein which seems likely.
Revelation 20:5 'the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished'.

[Rigon]

For those who have faith in the risen Jesus, we have all eternity to discuss such things.  Although, no doubt Jesus himself will generally be our focal point.  Its going to be awesome, hard, at least for me, to even begin to picture.

Looking over this thread i noticed my own points get some what confusing, but i think the main point is clear. I think the Bible builds a much better foundation on ultimately annihilating the wicked and the points for eternal torment couched in parabolic language and misinterpreted. Its the 1000 year rein that had me confused, the first resurrection which involves fire also, and the resurrection of the saved isn't the end finally. After the 1000 is the real end and fire involved again which devours satan and everything and everybody. I was confusing the 2, if there is a 1000 year rein which seems likely.
Revelation 20:5 'the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished'.

Every religious belief system has it's own method(s) of dealing with who/what the followers consider to be "good", or,  "evil", and each are just as valid as yours, or in other words, just another in a very long list of superstitious beliefs.
Zolace wants to yammer away and fool himself into believing that because you each may believe Jesus existed makes your debate viable, when the fact is neither of you can make the case for Jesus ever existing at all. It doesn't seem to bother superstitious people like you two to overlook these little details, but for people who actually THINK, it's an issue.
It's no skin off my ass if you two debate what happens to me or Hitler after we die, or whether or not good people get to ride unicorns,  and bad people get no ice cream after their dinner of worms in hell....

[Rigon]

At the end of the day, what have you accomplished other than wasting a lot of time and proving nothing? Not like you're debating science with Zolace, who will ignore facts and makeup lies to suit his warped agenda. When discussing "wicked" people and "hell", at least you don't have any of those nasty facts getting in your way......

...except for the FACT that you have no foundation and your "god" doesn't exist, but you'll just ignore that little factoid.

[zolace]

As an addendum, Rigon, Sana8410,BADecker and others who post on my topic I no doubt disagree about many political topics, and even on this one.  But, the central point of scripture is the risen Jesus.

I have no personal stake in the discussion of your superstitious beliefs. But on the other hand, if you people can prove your beliefs valid, then I would be very interested. It certainly would become personal if your beliefs are true.
My point is for you people at prove to yourselves that your beliefs are NOT superstitious. If you don't care, neither do I.

This is a lie.  That is the point.  Till you become honest about this, as it was pointed out, all you do is say the same thing over and over - changing the rules as you see fit.

[Rigon]

As an addendum, Rigon, Sana8410,BADecker and others who post on my topic I no doubt disagree about many political topics, and even on this one.  But, the central point of scripture is the risen Jesus.

I have no personal stake in the discussion of your superstitious beliefs. But on the other hand, if you people can prove your beliefs valid, then I would be very interested. It certainly would become personal if your beliefs are true.
My point is for you people at prove to yourselves that your beliefs are NOT superstitious. If you don't care, neither do I.

This is a lie.  That is the point.  Till you become honest about this, as it was pointed out, all you do is say the same thing over and over - changing the rules as you see fit.

You are like a stubborn child who constantly tells lies and thinks the grown-up don't know it. When you discuss your creationist beliefs, you lie. You claim to have evidence that your creator exists, but you lie.
You are in no position to challenge anyone else's honesty or integrity. You have none and have never had.
That is why I contend that you are not a Christian. Real Christians do not resort to bald-faced lies when defending their faith. You have no honesty or integrity because you constanly make claims that you can't back-up, and when challenged, you lie.
It would be better for you that you never made childish, assinine claims that EVERYONE knows are untrue.

[Rigon]

You wish to prove ME a liar?  Prove your bullshit beliefs and stop lying.
But we've been down that path more times than can be counted, and we all know that it leads to you posting more lies.  If your beliefs were valid, you wouldn't have to lie to avoid proving them.

[zolace]

You wish to prove ME a liar?  Prove your bullshit beliefs and stop lying.
But we've been down that path more times than can be counted, and we all know that it leads to you posting more lies.  If your beliefs were valid, you wouldn't have to lie to avoid proving them.

Been done by others.  Can you demonstrate that you are not?  Again, the below statement by you is false - you have basically admitted such elsewhere.

[zolace]

Kind of hard to take the below statement of yours serious, Rigon, when  you are willing to embrace in magic dinosaur blood to hold onto your beliefs.  Or lose a debate on Santa (one I gladly stayed out of).

if you people can prove your beliefs valid, then I would be very interested

[Rigon]

Kind of hard to take the below statement of yours serious, Rigon, when  you are willing to embrace in magic dinosaur blood to hold onto your beliefs.  Or lose a debate on Santa (one I gladly stayed out of).

if you people can prove your beliefs valid, then I would be very interested

The "debate" that you mention was ....My position is and has always been that  Santa Claus isn't real.How can you believe that I lost the "debate" on that?

[zolace]

Kind of hard to take the below statement of yours serious, Rigon, when  you are willing to embrace in magic dinosaur blood to hold onto your beliefs.  Or lose a debate on Santa (one I gladly stayed out of).

if you people can prove your beliefs valid, then I would be very interested

The "debate" that you mention was ....My position is and has always been that  Santa Claus isn't real.How can you believe that I lost the "debate" on that?

And that is what is so sad - you lost on that!


Anyway, as someone else commented on your perception of reality recently, your confusion will keep you from seeing that you are indeed embracing the magic dinosaur blood (which is what it is if you were honest) because you are truly not interested in any evidence for a Creator.

[zolace]

Any evidence for the Creator you will simply distort (and have) - and really, until you have a change in character that embraces honesty as more than just a commodity, there is no hope for you.

[Rigon]

Any evidence for the Creator you will simply distort (and have) - and really, until you have a change in character that embraces honesty as more than just a commodity, there is no hope for you.

Let me get this straight......

-Zolace believes DInosaurs and humans existed on this planet at the same time....
-Zolace believes Santa Claus is a real person.......

What is next for you, Zolace... the Earth is Flat?

....and when I point-out the errors of Zolace' beliefs..... I am the liar.

[zolace]

Any evidence for the Creator you will simply distort (and have) - and really, until you have a change in character that embraces honesty as more than just a commodity, there is no hope for you.

Let me get this straight......

-Zolace believes DInosaurs and humans existed on this planet at the same time....
-Zolace believes Santa Claus is a real person.......

What is next for you, Zolace... the Earth is Flat?

....and when I point-out the errors of Zolace' beliefs..... I am the liar.

I am not the one who had the debate with you in Santa.  You are embarrassed to own up on that little discussion you had (and lost) some time ago.  I stayed out of it.  Who were you debating?  Be honest.

[zolace]

But I suspect you will continue to be evasive.  Or, maybe post 6, 10 or more in a row.  If so, you can have the last word here for now, till either Sana8410 or I have the time to get back to the thread topic that no doubt is what is really bothering you.

[Rigon]

But I suspect you will continue to be evasive.  Or, maybe post 6, 10 or more in a row.  If so, you can have the last word here for now, till either Sana8410 or I have the time to get back to the thread topic that no doubt is what is really bothering you.

I have never been evasive about anything relevant to the discussion. True that I have ignored your childish distractions and your stupid straw man questions.

Speaking of being a liar and being evasive....

Where is that evidence you claim to have about ANYTHING you believe?

You waste more time attemtping  ( and failing!) to shout-down anyone who proves you to be a lying sack of shit, Zolace.
I can't believe that Sana8410, or anyone, would want to discuss anything with a known liar.

This is the topic of the thread, Zolace, and the only way you can deal with it is to lie like a whore.

[zolace]

It has been recorded that Herod did things we would consider unbelievable: The non-Christian writer is Macrobius (A.D. 395-423). Here is his comment,

When he [emperor Augustus] heard that among the boys in Syria under two years old whom Herod, king of the Jews, had ordered to kill, his own son was also killed, he said: it is better to be Herod's pig, than his son."

but i'm sure your right that some things in the Bible wouldn't show up in secular writings. If you wish to make that absolute truth that it never happened that's your option

Sana8410, was reading Matthew 5, and the below verses reminded me of our discusison (lost a bit amidst other things).

I looked at a few versions, but, it did not help clarify - what would you say 'hell' refers to here below?

27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.

[sana8410]

It has been recorded that Herod did things we would consider unbelievable: The non-Christian writer is Macrobius (A.D. 395-423). Here is his comment,

When he [emperor Augustus] heard that among the boys in Syria under two years old whom Herod, king of the Jews, had ordered to kill, his own son was also killed, he said: it is better to be Herod's pig, than his son."

but i'm sure your right that some things in the Bible wouldn't show up in secular writings. If you wish to make that absolute truth that it never happened that's your option

Sana8410, was reading Matthew 5, and the below verses reminded me of our discusison (lost a bit amidst other things).

I looked at a few versions, but, it did not help clarify - what would you say 'hell' refers to here below?

27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.

If you go back to page 1 i think post 8 (to lazy to look now) the thing about 3 different hells all translated as just the one word Hell. So i would say Gehenna describes Matt 5, which would mean the lake of fire and second death where the wicked are casted .

[Rigon]

It has been recorded that Herod did things we would consider unbelievable: The non-Christian writer is Macrobius (A.D. 395-423). Here is his comment,

When he [emperor Augustus] heard that among the boys in Syria under two years old whom Herod, king of the Jews, had ordered to kill, his own son was also killed, he said: it is better to be Herod's pig, than his son."

but i'm sure your right that some things in the Bible wouldn't show up in secular writings. If you wish to make that absolute truth that it never happened that's your option

Sana8410, was reading Matthew 5, and the below verses reminded me of our discusison (lost a bit amidst other things).

I looked at a few versions, but, it did not help clarify - what would you say 'hell' refers to here below?

27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.

If you go back to page 1 i think post 8 (to lazy to look now) the thing about 3 different hells all translated as just the one word Hell. So i would say Gehenna describes Matt 5, which would mean the lake of fire and second death where the wicked are casted .

If you really want to research it... "hell" is just as place that scares ignorant people who refuse to grow up.

Gehenna was a place where bodies were burned because there was no place to bury them.  Primative cities with large poulations couldn't alway take care of the dead.  .....   and the list goes on.


I would respectfully suggest you grow up.

[sana8410]

It has been recorded that Herod did things we would consider unbelievable: The non-Christian writer is Macrobius (A.D. 395-423). Here is his comment,

When he [emperor Augustus] heard that among the boys in Syria under two years old whom Herod, king of the Jews, had ordered to kill, his own son was also killed, he said: it is better to be Herod's pig, than his son."

but i'm sure your right that some things in the Bible wouldn't show up in secular writings. If you wish to make that absolute truth that it never happened that's your option

Sana8410, was reading Matthew 5, and the below verses reminded me of our discusison (lost a bit amidst other things).

I looked at a few versions, but, it did not help clarify - what would you say 'hell' refers to here below?

27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.

If you go back to page 1 i think post 8 (to lazy to look now) the thing about 3 different hells all translated as just the one word Hell. So i would say Gehenna describes Matt 5, which would mean the lake of fire and second death where the wicked are casted .

If you really want to research it... "hell" is just as place that scares ignorant people who refuse to grow up.

Gehenna was a place where bodies were burned because there was no place to bury them.  Primative cities with large poulations couldn't alway take care of the dead.  .....   and the list goes on.


I would respectfully suggest you grow up.

The scary part of hell is endless torture which isn't my claim if you forgot what tomas and myself are discussing, and yes i know what Gehenna was .