Which doctrine will disappear from mainline Christianity first ? "blood atonement" or "hell" ?

Question

and do you now believe in neither or one (please state which) or both ?

Peace and progress into ALL Truth ! (John 16:7-16)

Answer 1

The fact of hell certainly can't be disputed. Jesus often talked about hell, viz:

Luke 12:5
But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him.

Luke 16:23
In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side.

On the other hand, Jesus never talked about blood atonement. That is one theological theory among others to explain how Jesus' sacrificial death saved us. That particular theory is not essential Christianity, or as C. S. Lewis called it, "mere Christianity."

Cheers,
Bruce

Answer 2

Yes, I had heard about these. I picked up a card with them on at the Temple bookshop. And sorry, you guys, but unfortunately I don't think they're that good a witnessing tool. Many of the references are good, but some of them are a bit tenuous, some are open to interpretation, etc. I know it's no fun when a member disagrees with you, and I should be supporting the home team, but I remember being all excited seeing this card, then getting home, looking up the verses and thinking that it wasn't that strong an argument. There is far better scriptural evidence that this is the true church, and evidence elsewhere too. I love "Are Mormons Christians" by Stephen Robinson - I wish every anti-Mormon on here would read it. I do think 1 Corinthians 15:29 is evidence that the church is true, though. It demonstrates that baptism for the dead was practiced only 40 years after Christ's resurrection - but there is only one church on the Earth today still practising it.

Answer 3

If a Christian does not believe in the doctrine of Blood Atonement or Hell I wonder how they can be saved at all. Without understanding these basics about Jesus teachings I doubt you can "Believe" in a Jesus you do not know.

What I would like to see is the whole "life enhancement" or "prosperity" doctrine disappear. It is not biblical. Jesus did not die so that we could live comfortable.
Also get rid of this "accept" language when speaking of salvation and stick biblical terms like "Repentance and Faith".

Romans 3:25
"God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood."

Luke 12:5
"But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him."

Answer 4

Due to the times we are living in, and because there have been so many compromises to the gospel, I think the issue of hell. But I am also witnessing the blood atonement not being preached also. I continue to teach on both.

Answer 5

I am rather concerned about some who seem to take too narrowly Rom 10:13 For "whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved."
Mat 7:22 "Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?'
Mat 7:23 "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'
Practice seems to show what we really believe and a name in Hebrew had to do with a persons spirit as much as to the technical name. Technicalities can be important, but we must use discretion and all humility.
2 Cor 3:6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

Answer 6

Both were added fairly recently, and only exist in certain denominations. Neither are traditional doctrines. Blood atonement, in particular, was completely unheard of before Augustine, and did not gain any measure of popularity until the 11th century. It is still rejected by the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Nestorian, and Monophysite Churches. The doctrine of hell as a created fire meant to eternally torment the wicked is actually more recent than the whole blood atonement thing, and dates to the Council of Ferrara-Florence in the 15th century.

Answer 7

I think it must be hell, since Christ's supposed crucifiction has saved all those who believe in him. Blood atonement will stay on cos otherwise, Christ's crucifiction is superfluos, and the real basis for Christianity would have crumbled.

Answer 8

Neither can. Jesus' sacrifice (the ultimate atonement for sin) is the only access by which we are saved. Hell is a consequence and always will be. It's not stressed in sermons like it used to be and rightfully so because we should respond to God out of love more than fear. But Hell ain't goin' away.

Answer 9

One of the first doctrines to go will be the ridicules idea of a burning hell and as well as the idea of the one and only son of God.We are all sons of God and the great Masters have taught this all down through the ages.We are all on a long evolutionary journey towards becoming divine beings .Man is truly an emerging God and has within himself the grand plan for all of the ages to come ,including the seeds that will be the foundation for the coming new civilization which will be based on the love for ones fellow man and the brotherhood of all mankind

Answer 10

Trinity then Blood Atonement then Sola Fida.


.