has anyone read Edward Fudge - the fire that consumes ? it's an anihilationist book, but they reject hell as much as we do, so it might have some good arguments that can make it worth to read, has anyone read it?
Hi Sven ,
I have not dear , sorry :sigh:
Have you read it or thinking about reading it ?
:HeartThrob:
Hiya,
Yes.
It is well intentioned, but his conclusions are flawed.
Check your pm for my rebuttal to the first 3 chapters.
:happygrin: :laughing7:
QuoteHave you read it or thinking about reading it ?
i'm thinking about, i just have read that this book is a strong case against ET, teaching annihilation, as i said annihilationists reject the doctrine of hell as much as we do, we should really respect them therefore, he might have some good arguments against ET so i was just interested, my english is quite good but i'm not sure if i shall buy an english book if it isn't really worth it.
i'm 100% convinced that the bible teaches no hell, but moral and historical arguments might be interesting plus maybe arguments against the common unbiblical arguments for hell plus maybe refuting NDE's and other extra biblical arguments.
Ed Fudge's book was one of the ones that Thomas Talbott read as a stepping stone on his way to UR... :thumbsup:
QuoteEd Fudge's book was one of the ones that Thomas Talbott read as a stepping stone on his way to UR...
is his argumentation against ET strong? if so, i think i'll buy it
does he reject unbiblical doctrines and stuff like NDE's in a serious way?
Quote from: sven on January 25, 2009, 10:23:44 PM
QuoteEd Fudge's book was one of the ones that Thomas Talbott read as a stepping stone on his way to UR...
is his argumentation against ET strong? if so, i think i'll buy it
does he reject unbiblical doctrines and stuff like NDE's in a serious way?
Whom, Fudge or Talbott? I have not read Fudge's book.
Talbott doesn't even address NDE's, and I would imagine Fudge doesn't either.
there is more info, but it seems noone here knows the book:
http://www.edwardfudge.com/written/fire.html
Hiya!
I have read it, and his arguments are weak.