The wages of sin is DEATH, not eternal torment in Hell.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,575
6,063
EST
✟991,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Prior to that post there was no argument, and there still isn't, except on your part. I simply made the statement that I did not believe that Jesus said the words of the story or parable of the rich man and Lazarus, and I gave my reasons for not believing that it was the words of Jesus. Nothing has changed. I still do not believe that the parable or story was spoken by Jesus. Jesus was not ever inconsistent in his teachings. He was very truthful. He said what he meant and meant what he said. Though he did use the every day events and occurrences to present parables as a means for teaching them, it would have been strictly out of character for him to use a Jewish fable or a heathen myth as a means of teaching and leading his people.

Right! You made a statement to me challenging what I posted. That is an argument. Your unsupported opinion what would have been out of character for Jesus has zero weight. Please show me this "Jewish fable or a heathen myth?" Luke 16:19-31 has been accepted by the church as genuine for 2000 years +/- nothing you have said proves any different. My conclusion is that anything which contradicts your assumptions/presuppositions is "Jewish fable or a heathen myth."

That's really flimsy, and I believe you know better. First, since the author of Job in an earlier statement said, in effect, that he had come from the womb naked and that he would return there naked, that is evidence that the "womb" under consideration here was the earth itself as the author most likely believed that we came from the dust of the earth.

"The author most likely believed" this is assumption/presupposition and it does not refute what I posted.

Next, There are very few who die that are not remembered by someone, especially by the woman who bore them if she is alive when they die. So it is not the living that forgets and remembers them no more. It is God who remembers them no more, as the passage goes on to say that because they are forgotten, wickedness is broken as a tree. It takes more than just man's forgetting someone to "break wickedness as a tree [is broken]". It takes God's putting them out of his remembrance to do away with their wickedness that he allows to perish with them in the grave.

Your out-of-context proof text says nothing about "God putting them out of his remembrance"

Job 24:19 Drought and heat consume the snow waters: so doth the grave those which have sinned.
20 The womb shall forget him; the worm shall feed sweetly on him; he shall be no more remembered; and wickedness shall be broken as a tree.​

Note your proof text is not about mankind in general, all the pronouns, him 2x, and he, refer to those who have sinned, vs. 19. This is what I mean by read in-context.

Just a few scriptures for you to chew on for a little while -

Job 3:11. "Why died I not from the womb? why did I not give up the ghost when I came out of the belly? 12. Why did the knees prevent me? or why the breasts that I should suck? 13. For now should I have lain still and been quiet, I should have slept: then had I been at rest, 14. With kings and counsellers of the earth, which built desolate places for themselves; 15. Or with princes that had gold, who filled their houses with silver: 16. Or as an hidden untimely birth I had not been; as infants which never saw light. 17. There the wicked cease from troubling; and there the weary be at rest. 18. There the prisoners rest together; they hear not the voice of the oppressor. 19. The small and great are there; and the servant is free from his master."

What is your point? “There,[in the grave], the wicked cease from troubling; and there [in the grave] the weary be at rest. There [in the grave] the prisoners rest together; they hear not the voice of the oppressor. The small and great are there;[in the grave] and the servant is free from his master.” None of that proves anything about Job 24:20.

Isa. 26:13. "O LORD our God, other lords beside thee have had dominion over us: but by thee only will we make mention of thy name. 14. They are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased, they shall not rise: therefore hast thou visited and destroyed them, and made all their memory to perish."
Psa. 88:3. "For my soul is full of troubles: and my life draweth nigh unto the grave. 4.I am counted with them that go down into the pit: I am as a man that hath no strength: 5. Free among the dead, like the slain that lie in the grave, whom thou rememberest no more: and they are cut off from thy
hand."

Again what is your point? People in the grave. This proves nothing about Job 24:20.

That's a strange question since everyone that I know who are still alive have never died.

Read the question again, you missed or ignored part of the question. My point is everybody dies, no exceptions.

I will say this: I do not know what place in the scriptures that it could belong, but I do not believe that it belongs there in that particular place. As to the parable itself being true or false, I believe what it teaches is false, as it has no scriptural support anywhere else in the scriptures.(that is another reason why I do not believe that Jesus said it.) But it is possible that it is a genuine rabbinical parable. I cannot quote the source, but I read somewhere that there is one much like it in the Gemara.

In other words you do not have any credible, verifiable, historical evidence that Luke 16:19-31 is a Jewish fable or a pagan myth.

In your opinion who spoke the words in vss. 10-13? How do you know? Who is speaking in vs.15 and 17:1? Do tell.

As I thought you can't answer the question. Glad to answer this as you as you answer me.

I have noticed something quite peculiar in your posts: It seems that everyone's opinion but yours on any subject are simply "assumptions/presupposition."

Only when whatever someone says is not supported with some kind of evidence, scriptural, lexical, grammatical, and/or historical, such as your comment above, “The author most likely believed”

Have you not ever heard that history is in the hand of the recorder of such? especially if the recorder was not present when the events they are writing about were taking place.

The way I heard it was “The victor writes the history.” But that is irrelevant to the ECF.

Clement does a little more than just mention a myth about the Phoenix. It is quite clear that this fellow actually believed the myth, as he refers to it as a sign. I sought to bring that to your attention by bolding "Let us consider that wonderful sign". Guess you must have missed that.
Now, if this man believed that such a thing as this was true, or if he had no more spiritual understanding than that, then I have a problem with giving credence to any other of his commentaries.

No, I did not miss anything. My understanding of what Clement said is just as valid as yours. It may well be that Clement, with nothing to prove otherwise, believed the myth, which proves absolutely nothing about his other views. I’m sure that we can find questionable comments in most of the ECF, they were all pagans before they were Christians. If we throw out the views of the ECF then we have to throw out much of our understanding of koiné Greek. For example, Homer Philo, Josephus. Lucian, Hermippus, Ignatius, Aristotle, Pythagorus. Hermes. Suetonius, are all listed in the definition of [size=+1]θεος[/size]/theos in the Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker lexicon of NT Greek. Link to Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker lexicon online.

I'm sure you have historical and verifiable proof and evidence that this is true and are just dying to post it, but first I have to inquire of you as to where the first church of which Pope Linus who began his reign in c.67 was located?

"The earliest witness is Irenaeus, who in about the year 180 wrote: "The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate." The Oxford Dictionary of Popes interprets Irenaeus as saying that Linus was the first bishop of Rome. Linus is presented by Jerome as "the first after Peter to be in charge of the Roman Church", by Eusebius, as "the first to receive the episcopate of the church at Rome, after the martyrdom of Paul and Peter"John Chrysostom says "This Linus, some say, was second Bishop of the Church of Rome after Peter", [...] -Wickipedia -

What is your point? There was a church in Rome and it did have a bishop. There were also churches, in Jerusalem, Alexandria, Babylon, and several other major cities and they all had bishops and none were an authority over the churches in other cities. You can check this for yourself in 1075, Pope Gregory VII “pronounced the title of ‘pope’ the sole and peculiar dignity of the Bishops of Rome. In his Dictatus Papae, he stated that the pope had the right to depose emperors, that the pope’s authority is the authority of Christ, that the papal office alone was universal in its authority.”

Why would I need any historical evidence that directly relates to your quotes? And once again ECF don't impress me much, and I have already given my reason as to why they don't.

And your unsupported opinion, assumptions/presuppositions impress me not at all.

Says who? Oh, let me guess, the ECF. Right?

"It is recorded by Irenaeus, who heard him speak in his youth, and by Tertullian, that he had been a disciple of John the Apostle. Saint Jerome wrote that Polycarp was a disciple of John and that John had ordained him bishop of Smyrna."

"Perhaps one of the most intriguing aspects of Polycarp's early manhood was his acquaintance with the apostle John. Twenty years they knew each other, and Polycarp had the privilege of studying at John's feet. It is easy to envy Polycarp. One can imagine listening to Jesus' beloved disciple speak of his years with the Lord and teach what Christ had taught him. All this careful training prepared him for work in the church."

Where is the credible, verifiable evidence that these men knew what they were talking about?
The writings of the ECF is the historical evidence. Do you have anything other than your own opinion for rejecting Luke 16:19-1, and/or ECF?
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,575
6,063
EST
✟991,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
DER ALTER

Again the ECF's were fallible men just like me and you; no reason to believe in them but to rely on the Holy scripture to enlighten us of the truth. Again where is the proof that a unbeliever receives an immortal state in the scripture? We can't view the scripture then say this is what it means or think that's what it means. The scripture defines it's self. Everytime you give a verse you try and explain what it means; that is the problem. Just let the scripture define itself...

That explains Phillip telling the eunuch to just let the scripture define itself - oh wait.

And let us not forget. Acts 18:26.

Act 18:26 And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.​
 
Upvote 0

Hillsage

One 4 Him & Him 4 all
Supporter
Jun 12, 2009
5,244
1,767
The land of OZ
✟322,350.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
TBN is a joke to be sure.
I've found many treasures, in fields deemed unworthy by brethren making statements like this. I think that's sad, if one really wants to know 'WhatisTheTruth7' (sic). ;)

So if I may implore of you, just what is this big joke of TBN, that isn't just as applicable to all us 'talking heads' here? Is it something new? I ask because I've not seen TBN for several years now. Though I do still cling to some treasures you possibly don't have...just assuming of course. ;)
 
Upvote 0

DrBubbaLove

Roman Catholic convert from Southern Baptist
Supporter
Aug 8, 2004
11,336
1,728
63
Left coast
✟55,100.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
DRBubbaLove-

The Apostles taught the Gospel back then; they did not have Bibles to hand out back then; they were teaching what we are reading in the Bible. so what's your point there?

The Holy Spirit is our teacher and comforter; In todays World you will be hard pressed to find a good teacher of the word ecspecially on TV. TBN is a joke to be sure.
You have to follow the exchange. My first post followed someone saying essentially all we need is Scripture because scripture defines scripture - IOW we just need to read it and it will come to us.

I pointed out that is not what is demonstrated in the ACTS of the Aposltes - (or in the rest of the NT for that matter). They went out and taught. Further they picked a few faithful men to train at each locale and told them to pass down those teachings faithfully.

Another poster repling to that second post of mine, reference the noble minded Thessalonians studing their scripture to verify what they heard. I assumed this was a rebuttal to my last post, but could be wrong on that - I replied as if it was a rebuttal to my first post.

I replied back that essentially what the Thessalonians heard (which they wanted to verify) is what the Apostles taught, and the only scriptures they could have been using to verify what was taught to them by the Apostles was the OT, which means or at least strongly suggests that the only thing they could be using the OT to verify would be prophecy about Jesus (or I guess perhaps on a broader scale how the new message fullfills the OT promises, prophecies...etc).

I closed that with stating (as you repeat here) that they were told to go teach, not hand out OT scriptures. I think we are on the same page at least on this point.
 
Upvote 0

he-man

he-man
Oct 28, 2010
8,891
301
usa
✟90,748.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
And let us not forget. Acts 18:26.
Act 18:26 And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.
Here is BAG from the book and I scanned it here. I don't know where your website you posted got that one! It is not correct.
[FONT=Arial Narrow, sans-serif]INDEX [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]TΟ THΕ RΕVISED [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]BAUΕR- ARΝDT-GIΝGRICΗ [/FONT][FONT=Arial Narrow, sans-serif]GREEK [/FONT][FONT=Arial Narrow, sans-serif]LEXICON[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]SECCND ΕDITIOΝ[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]BΥ F. WiILBUR GINGRICH[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]& FRιEDfR1CK W. DANKER[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]EDITED BY[/FONT]
JOHN R. ALSOP​

Page 15
Matthew 7.13
12 άνθρωπος 1 α δ people 68c
Θέλω 1 wish 355α
ίνα II 1 α α in order that 377c
νόμος 4 α law 543α
όσος 2 how great 586c
ούτος 1 α this 596d
πάς, πάσα, άάv 1 e γ all 632c
προφήτης 1 prophet 723c
σύ 1 c you 772b
12α ποιέω I é d â dï 682b

13 άτrάγω 3 lead away 79d
απώλεια 2 destruction 103c

εiσέρχομαι I f come 233α
είσέρχομαι 2 α come 233b
εύρύχωρος broad 326α
όδός 2 α way 554b
ότι 3 b that 589d
πλατύς broad 667á
πολύς I 1 α α many 687d

13α διά A I 1 through 179c
πύλη 2 gate 729b
13b διά A I 1 through 179c
πύλη 2 gate 729b
13f στενός narrow 766b
14 άτrάγω 3 lead away

Page 420
2 Thessalonians 2.9
7 ούρανός 2 b heaven 595α
8 δίδωμι 1 b ρ give 193α
έκδίκησις vengeance 238d
εύαγγέλιον 2 b α gospel 318b
θεός 3 b God 357c
κύριος 2 c ã lord 460b
οίδα 2 know 556b
πύρ 1 b fire 730b
ϋnακούω 1 listen tο 837b
φλόξ flame 862b

9 αίώνιος 3 eternal 28c
άττό III 1 away from 87b
δίκη 1 penalty 198c
δόξα 1 α brightness 203c
ϊσχύς strength 383d

όλέθριος destructive 563b
όλεθρος destruction 563b

τrρόσωnον 1 c α face 721b
τίνω pay 818d

10 άγιος 2 d á the holy ones 10á
έκείνος 2 b ρ that 239d
ένδοξάζομαι hοποred 263b
έπί III 1 α ζ oΠ 288d
έρχομαι I 1 α come 311á
ήμέρα 3 b ρ day 347b
Θαυμάζω 1 b β wonder 352c
μαρτύρων 1 b testimony 494á
πάς, πάσα, πάν 1 d β all 632b
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,575
6,063
EST
✟991,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Here is BAG from the book and I scanned it here. I don't know where your website you posted got that one! It is not correct.
INDEX TΟ THΕ RΕVISED BAUΕR- ARΝDT-GIΝGRICΗ GREEK LEXICON

SECCND ΕDITIOΝ
BΥ F. WiILBUR GINGRICH
& FRιEDfR1CK W. DANKER
EDITED BY
JOHN R. ALSOP

Page 15
Matthew 7.13
12 άνθρωπος 1 α δ people 68c
Θέλω 1 wish 355α
ίνα II 1 α α in order that 377c
νόμος 4 α law 543α
όσος 2 how great 586c
ούτος 1 α this 596d
πάς, πάσα, άάv 1 e γ all 632c
προφήτης 1 prophet 723c
σύ 1 c you 772b
12α ποιέω I é d â dï 682b

13 άτrάγω 3 lead away 79d
απώλεια 2 destruction 103c

εiσέρχομαι I f come 233α
είσέρχομαι 2 α come 233b
εύρύχωρος broad 326α
όδός 2 α way 554b
ότι 3 b that 589d
πλατύς broad 667á
πολύς I 1 α α many 687d

13α διά A I 1 through 179c
πύλη 2 gate 729b
13b διά A I 1 through 179c
πύλη 2 gate 729b
13f στενός narrow 766b
14 άτrάγω 3 lead away

Page 420
2 Thessalonians 2.9
7 ούρανός 2 b heaven 595α
8 δίδωμι 1 b ρ give 193α
έκδίκησις vengeance 238d
εύαγγέλιον 2 b α gospel 318b
θεός 3 b God 357c
κύριος 2 c ã lord 460b
οίδα 2 know 556b
πύρ 1 b fire 730b
ϋnακούω 1 listen tο 837b
φλόξ flame 862b

9 αίώνιος 3 eternal 28c
άττό III 1 away from 87b
δίκη 1 penalty 198c
δόξα 1 α brightness 203c
ϊσχύς strength 383d

όλέθριος destructive 563b
όλεθρος destruction 563b

τrρόσωnον 1 c α face 721b
τίνω pay 818d

10 άγιος 2 d á the holy ones 10á
έκείνος 2 b ρ that 239d
ένδοξάζομαι hοποred 263b
έπί III 1 α ζ oΠ 288d
έρχομαι I 1 α come 311á
ήμέρα 3 b ρ day 347b
Θαυμάζω 1 b β wonder 352c
μαρτύρων 1 b testimony 494á
πάς, πάσα, πάν 1 d β all 632b

This is not the lexical entry for apoleia from BAG. This is exactly what it says it is, the index. That is why each line has a page number at the end. The online BAG I linked reads exactly as my hard copy of the 1958 edition.
 
Upvote 0

he-man

he-man
Oct 28, 2010
8,891
301
usa
✟90,748.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
This is not the lexical entry for apoleia from BAG. This is exactly what it says it is, the index. That is why each line has a page number at the end. The online BAG I linked reads exactly as my hard copy of the 1958 edition.
Okay, thanks, but your Link does not work.

Show me on page 103 and 563 exactly what BAG says in Greek and English if not απώλεια 2 destruction 103c
όλέθριος destructive 563b
 
Upvote 0
Jun 27, 2013
41
2
✟15,171.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
DER ALTER

How will the sinner be burning in Hell forever? The scripture makes it clear that God is everywhere. Sinners can't be in Hell burning forever or else God would be with them throughout all Eternity. The Bible does say that God is the all consuming fire though and the wicked will melt as wax at his presense. It's just hard to understand where numerous scriptures state the unrighteous/wicked will perish but then you state well the scripture really means this; thats how we have many false religons today because people take the Bible and twist the words around/change there meaning to fit a belief rather than gain an understanding of what the word says to build there foundation and go from there...
 
Upvote 0
Jun 27, 2013
41
2
✟15,171.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
DrBubbaLove

I read the scripture for years and years and did not understand the meaning of them; the Holy spirit has to convey it to people. The Lost person is blind in there understanding of the scripture and will not understand it at all. Believers are only able to understand the Bible as the Holy spirit chooses to reveal the scriptures to us. Why do we have so many false teachings today? Becasue man has inserted his own ideas into the scripture. Last time I checked that leads one down the road to heresy...

Yes it's more than just reading the words on the page; if you read the Bible like a fictional book then it will lead one to all sorts of confusion. I do understand where you are coming from though...
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hillsage

One 4 Him & Him 4 all
Supporter
Jun 12, 2009
5,244
1,767
The land of OZ
✟322,350.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
HillSAGE

TBN has Fasle teachers on regurarly; do you not agree?
Like I said, been a few years since it was on. All we have is antennae TV and they dropped our area. Personally I think that 'false teacher' pretty much applies to all teachers according to scripture. I'm always eating grapes/meat and spitting out seeds/bones....I think. :confused:

JAM 3:1 Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, for you know that we who teach shall be judged with greater strictness. 2 For we all make many mistakes, and if any one makes no mistakes in what he says he is a perfect man, able to bridle the whole body also.

I can't say "I am a perfect man yet." But I am more perfect than I was...I think. :blush: And if you think about it; Every teacher is somebody's heretic. :doh:

But 'true teacher' also applies to all teachers IMO. That's where we must depend upon the 'the Sspirit to lead and guide us into the truth'.
 
Upvote 0

shturt678

Senior Veteran
Feb 1, 2013
5,280
103
Hawaii
✟13,428.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Like I said, been a few years since it was on. All we have is antennae TV and they dropped our area. Personally I think that 'false teacher' pretty much applies to all teachers according to scripture. I'm always eating grapes/meat and spitting out seeds/bones....I think. :confused:

JAM 3:1 Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, for you know that we who teach shall be judged with greater strictness. 2 For we all make many mistakes, and if any one makes no mistakes in what he says he is a perfect man, able to bridle the whole body also.

I can't say "I am a perfect man yet." But I am more perfect than I was...I think. :blush: And if you think about it; Every teacher is somebody's heretic. :doh:

But 'true teacher' also applies to all teachers IMO. That's where we must depend upon the 'the Sspirit to lead and guide us into the truth'.

Just have to get the Holy Spirit within God's way, or is it God's ways? Otherwise tormented for forever kind of thing where there are doctors, but don't know if they can prescribe badly needed pain meds., ie, I think I can push the envelope only about this far for my point...owe, that hurts.....Mk.9:43-48 just for starters. Just your ol' old friend Jack on the sidelines rooting for you. :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,575
6,063
EST
✟991,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Okay, thanks, but your Link does not work.

Show me on page 103 and 563 exactly what BAG says in Greek and English if not απώλεια 2 destruction 103c
όλέθριος destructive 563b

I already posted the BAG definition of apoleia

[SIZE="+1"]όλέθριος ον[/SIZE] ( Hom. +; cf. Crönert 186; LXX ) act. (so mostly, incl. Polyb. 2, 68, 10; 3 Km 21:42 ) deadly, destructive divkh punishment 2 Th 1:9 v.l .*

[SIZE="+1"]όλέθρος, ου, ο [/SIZE]( Hom. +; Dit., Syll. 3 527, 82 [ c. 220 BC ]; BGU 1027 XXVI, 11; LXX ; Philo ; Jos. , Ant. 17, 38, Vi. 264; Sib. Or. 3, 327; 348) destruction, ruin, death in our lit. always w. some kind of relig. coloring: e[rcetaiv tini o[l. ruin comes upon someone 1 Cl 57:4 (Pr 1:26 ). aijfnivdio" aujtoi`" ejfivstatai o[l. sudden destruction will come upon them 1 Th 5:3 . buqivzein tina; eij" o[l. plunge someone headlong into ruin 1 Ti 6:9 . o[l. aijwvnio" eternal death ( Test. Reub. 6:3) 2 Th 1:9 ( s.ojlevqrio" ). paradou`naiv tina tw`/ satana`/ eij" o[l. th`" sarkov" hand someone over to Satan for the destruction of his flesh 1 Cor 5:5 (handing over to Satan will result in the sinner’s death.—EvDobschütz, Die urchristl. Gemeinden ’02, 269-72 and s. paradivdwmi 1b.— Hierocles 14 p. 451b has the thought that the soul of the sinner in Hades is purified by the tortures of hell, and is saved thereby). Destruction brought about by Satan is mentioned also IEph 13:1 o{tan puknw`" ejpi; to; aujto; givnesqe, kaqairou`ntai aiJ dunavmei" tou` satana` kai; luvetai oJ o[l. aujtou` when you come together frequently, the ( spirit- ) powers of Satan are destroyed, and his destructiveness is nullified. M-M. *

A Greek-English Lexicon Gingrich & Danker
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,575
6,063
EST
✟991,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
DER ALTER

How will the sinner be burning in Hell forever? The scripture makes it clear that God is everywhere. Sinners can't be in Hell burning forever or else God would be with them throughout all Eternity. The Bible does say that God is the all consuming fire though and the wicked will melt as wax at his presense. It's just hard to understand where numerous scriptures state the unrighteous/wicked will perish but then you state well the scripture really means this; thats how we have many false religons today because people take the Bible and twist the words around/change there meaning to fit a belief rather than gain an understanding of what the word says to build there foundation and go from there...

Yes you do have your 2-3 out-of-context proof texts while you ignore the rest of scripture.

The scriptures you are referring to which "state the unrighteous/wicked will perish" the word translated perish is used in the NT to describe men killed by Pilate, men drowning, men "dying" from hunger, spoiled food, spilled wine, broken wineskins, etc. I think I have listed the verses before. So if you want the word to mean something else you will have to prove it. Can you do that?

You have made a false accusation. Please show me where I "twist the words around/change there meaning to fit a belief?" I have twisted nothing and changed nothing. What I have done is research how a word sometimes translated "perish" is used in other verses in the NT. Have you checked your own beliefs the same way?
 
Upvote 0
Jun 27, 2013
41
2
✟15,171.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
DER ALTER

If anything thats what you are doing with the verses you have selected; take them out of context; and those same verses do not state that a lost unrepentant person will suffer eternal torment for all of Eternity.

John 3:16 The Greek word for perish is Apollymi- to destroy In the context of this verse it is a contrast between life and Death...

False Accusation? I stated many false religons are started because of people twisiting scripture around. I believe ETD is wrong but it is not a religon...

Also Mathew 25- you state that the Eternal Punsishment means Eternal Torment; thats not correct; you changed an Eternal Punishment to an Eternal Punishing when stating the lost will suffer eternal torment forever...
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hillsage

One 4 Him & Him 4 all
Supporter
Jun 12, 2009
5,244
1,767
The land of OZ
✟322,350.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Just have to get the Holy Spirit within God's way, or is it God's ways? .Mk.9:43-48 just for starters. Just your ol' old friend Jack on the sidelines rooting for you. :thumbsup:
I wonder if the Spirit led you to pen this opening for me. Pricilla/Aquilla didn't just give Apollos some more 'head knowledge' or 'approved teaching'. They spoke to him of something deeper concerning 'GOD'S WAYS'.

ACT 18:24 And a certain Jew named Apollos,...25...was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently (Gr. exactly) the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.

So also today we have those who are fervent in the power of their born again spirit. And they too accurately teach the ways of the Lord unto salvation knowing only the baptism of John, who taught a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. And yet those same brethren have not the baptism of The Spirit which is subsequent to the baptism of repentance/John.

ACT 18:26 And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.

And what 'WAY of God' did they make Apollos aware of???? Well, just a couple of verses later I believe Paul tells us what that impacting 'WAY' was/is.

ACT 19:1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, 2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost SINCE ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. 3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

Here again the question isn't did you receive WHEN you believed, but SINCE becoming a born again repentance baptized believer just like Apollos was a mere 5 verses earlier.

I see the wisdom of the Spirit's unction-ing, in how these verses were inspired and woven closely together into scripture...even though the hand of translators put an unfortunate chapter break in, causing the subtlety shared, to be easily missed...all IMO...of course. There is also much more subtlety still unshared here too.
 
Upvote 0

Evergreen48

Senior Member
Aug 24, 2006
2,300
150
✟17,819.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Der Alter said:
Right! You made a statement to me challenging what I posted. That is an argument.

I've challenged several of your posts as well as you have mine. Agreed there is an argument. What's your point?

Your unsupported opinion what would have been out of character for Jesus has zero weight.
Please show me this "Jewish fable or a heathen myth?" Luke 16:19-31 has been accepted by the church as genuine for 2000 years +/- nothing you have said proves any different. My conclusion is that anything which contradicts your assumptions/presuppositions is "Jewish fable or a heathen myth."

That is your opinion, and it is unsupported also. But if you believe that Jesus would have used even pagan mythology in his teachings you have a different opinion of him than I. As far as the Jewish fable is concerned, take a look at this excerpt from what was believed for several hundred years to be the work of Flavius Josephus the first century historian. Later opinions of the last century are, that it is actually the work of Hippolytus of Rome (170–235). As for my own personal belief; and it is a belief that is shared by others, I believe it is the work of Josephus, for I have read an account by Hippolytus' and it is obvious that he draws from the work of Flavius Josephus, as there are many similarities in his account to that of Josephus' whose works preceded his by almost a century. To read Hippolytus' work which is under consideration here you may go to: ANF05. Fathers of the Third Century: Hippolytus, Cyprian, Caius, Novatian, Appendix - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

An excerpt from the extract of Flavius Josephus Discourse To the Greeks Concerning Hades

1. NOW as to Hades, wherein the souls of the of the good things they see, and rejoice in the righteous and unrighteous are detained, it is necessary to speak of it. Hades is a place in the world not regularly finished; a subterraneous region, wherein the light of this world does not shine; from which circumstance, that in this region the light does not shine, it cannot be but there must be in it perpetual darkness. This region is allotted as a place of custody for souls, which angels are appointed as guardians to them, who distribute to them temporary punishments, agreeable to every one's behavior and manners.

2. In this region there is a certain place set apart, as a lake of unquenchable fire, whereinto we suppose no one hath hitherto been cast; but it is prepared for a day afore-determined by God, in which one righteous sentence shall deservedly be passed upon all men; when the unjust, and those that have been disobedient to God, and have given honor to such idols as have been the vain operations of the hands of men as to God himself, shall be adjudged to this everlasting punishment, as having been the causes of defilement; while the just shall obtain an incorruptible and never-fading kingdom. These are now indeed confined in Hades, but not in the same place wherein the unjust are confined.

3. For there is one descent into this region, at whose gate we believe there stands an archangel with an host; which gate when those pass through that are conducted down by the angels appointed over souls, they do not go the same way; but the just are guided to the right hand, and are led with hymns, sung by the angels appointed over that place, unto a region of light, in which the just have dwelt from the beginning of the world; not constrained by necessity, but ever enjoying the prospect of the good things they see, and rejoic in the expectation of those new enjoyments which will be peculiar to every one of them, and esteeming those things beyond what we have here; with whom there is no place of toil, no burning heat, no piercing cold, nor are any briers there; but the countenance of the and of the just, which they see, always smiles them, while they wait for that rest and eternal new life in heaven, which is to succeed this region. This place we call The Bosom of Abraham.

4. But as to the unjust, they are dragged by force to the left hand by the angels allotted for punishment, no longer going with a good-will, but as prisoners driven by violence; to whom are sent the angels appointed over them to reproach them and threaten them with their terrible looks, and to thrust them still downwards. Now those angels that are set over these souls drag them into the neighborhood of hell itself; who, when they are hard by it, continually hear the noise of it, and do not stand clear of the hot vapor itself; but when they have a near view of this spectacle, as of a terrible and exceeding great prospect of fire, they are struck with a fearful expectation of a future judgment, and in effect punished thereby: and not only so, but where they see the place [or choir] of the fathers and of the just, even hereby are they punished; for a chaos deep and large is fixed between them; insomuch that a just man that hath compassion upon them cannot be admitted, nor can one that is unjust, if he were bold enough to attempt it, pass over it. [...] (the entire extract from Discourse To The Greeks Concerning Hades writing can be found at http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/hades.htm



And this brief article from the Encarta Encyclopedia gives a small account of Hades in Greek mythology:

Hades, in Greek mythology, god of the dead. He was the son of the Titans Cronus and Rhea and the brother of Zeus and Poseidon. When the three brothers divided up the universe after they had deposed their father, Cronus, Hades was awarded the underworld. There, with his queen, Persephone, whom he had abducted from the world above, he ruled the kingdom of the dead. Although he was a grim and pitiless god, unappeased by either prayer or sacrifice, he was not evil. In fact, he was known also as Pluto, lord of riches, because both crops and precious metals were believed to come from his kingdom below ground.
The underworld itself was often called Hades. It was divided into two regions: Erebus, where the dead pass as soon as they die, and Tartarus, the deeper region, where the Titans had been imprisoned. It was a dim and unhappy place, inhabited by vague forms and shadows and guarded by Cerberus, the three-headed, dragon-tailed dog. Sinister rivers separated the underworld from the world above, and the aged boatman Charon ferried the souls of the dead across these waters. Somewhere in the darkness of the underworld Hades' palace was located. It was represented as a many-gated, dark and gloomy place, thronged with guests, and set in the midst of shadowy fields and an apparition-haunted landscape. In later legends the underworld is described as the place where the good are rewarded and the wicked punished. -Encarta-

More about the Hades myth can be found at Hades - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Anyone who is not willingly ignorant of what is so apparent can see the resemblance between what the Jews of Jesus' day believed about Hades and the actual Hades myth.
Where did these people get these outrageous ideas about Hades? It certainly isn't scriptual.


What is the following from the highly esteemed Hebraist, John Lightfoot's (1602-1675) commentary on John 11 concerning the death of Martha's brother, Lazarus, if it is not myth?

"They go to the sepulchres, and visit the dead for three days. Neither are they solicitous lest they should incur the reproach of the Amorites." The story is, They visited a certain person, and he revived again, and lived five-and-twenty years, and then died. They tell of another that lived again, and begot children, and then died.

"It is a tradition of Ben Kaphra's: The very height of mourning is not till the third day. For three days the spirit wanders about the sepulchre, expecting if it may return into the body. But when it sees that the form or aspect of the face is changed, then it hovers no more, but leaves the body to itself."
"They do not certify of the dead" [that this is the very man, and not another] 'but within the three days after his decease': for after three days his countenance is changed."


"The author most likely believed" this is assumption/presupposition and it does not refute what I posted.

I can see that this is highly troubling for such a precise mind as you obviously have, so for your benefit I will change that from "The author believed that man came from the dust." That will change little as it is said of the character or real person whose name was Job: "that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil." That being the case it is of a certainty that he believed Moses' account of the creation of man. (Gen. 2:4)

Your out-of-context proof text says nothing about "God putting them out of his remembrance"

You've already lost that round, as it has already been resolved that there is always someone who will remember anyone who has died -especially the mother of that person if she is alive at their demise. And besides this the following verses were cited to confirm that God does put the wicked out of his memory.

Isa. 26:13. "O LORD our God, other lords beside thee have had dominion over us: but by thee only will we make mention of thy name. 14. They are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased, they shall not rise: therefore hast thou visited and destroyed them, and made all their memory to perish."

Psa. 88:3. "For my soul is full of troubles: and my life draweth nigh unto the grave. 4.I am counted with them that go down into the pit: I am as a man that hath no strength: 5. Free among the dead, like the slain that lie in the grave, whom thou rememberest no more: and they are cut off from thy hand."


Job 24:19 Drought and heat consume the snow waters: so doth the grave those which have sinned.
20 The womb shall forget him; the worm shall feed sweetly on him; he shall be no more remembered; and wickedness shall be broken as a tree.
Note your proof text is not about mankind in general, all the pronouns, him 2x, and he, refer to those who have sinned, vs. 19. This is what I mean by read in-context.

LOL, Has not man in general sinned? And are you trying to say that he puts only "those who have sinned" (who are described in the foregoing verses) out of his memrory? That's quite comical, Der, but you need to come up with something better than that.

Job 3:11. "Why died I not from the womb? why did I not give up the ghost when I came out of the belly? 12. Why did the knees prevent me? or why the breasts that I should suck? 13. For now should I have lain still and been quiet, I should have slept: then had I been at rest, 14. With kings and counsellers of the earth, which built desolate places for themselves; 15. Or with princes that had gold, who filled their houses with silver: 16. Or as an hidden untimely birth I had not been; as infants which never saw light. 17. There the wicked cease from troubling; and there the weary be at rest. 18. There the prisoners rest together; they hear not the voice of the oppressor. 19. The small and great are there; and the servant is free from his master."
What is your point? “There,[in the grave], the wicked cease from troubling; and there [in the grave] the weary be at rest. There [in the grave] the prisoners rest together; they hear not the voice of the oppressor. The small and great are there;[in the grave] and the servant is free from his master.” None of that proves anything about Job 24:20.

No, it just proves that there is NO CONSCIOUSNESS of anyone after they are dead and in the grave.

Isa. 26:13. "O LORD our God, other lords beside thee have had dominion over us: but by thee only will we make mention of thy name. 14. They are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased, they shall not rise: therefore hast thou visited and destroyed them, and made all their memory to perish."
Psa. 88:3. "For my soul is full of troubles: and my life draweth nigh unto the grave. 4.I am counted with them that go down into the pit: I am as a man that hath no strength: 5. Free among the dead, like the slain that lie in the grave, whom thou rememberest no more: and they are cut off from thy hand."
Again what is your point? People in the grave. This proves nothing about Job 24:20.

As if you didn't already know, it shows that it is God, not man, who remembers those wicked ones NO MORE, just as Job 24:20 teaches.

Read the question again, you missed or ignored part of the question. My point is everybody dies, no exceptions.

Then you need to reword your comment.
But yes, everyone dies. How is that related to the discussion? cont . . . .
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Evergreen48

Senior Member
Aug 24, 2006
2,300
150
✟17,819.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
In other words you do not have any credible, verifiable, historical evidence that Luke 16:19-31 is a Jewish fable or a pagan myth.

I don't need any as you say and say and say "credible, verifiable, historical evidence" that Luke 16:19-31 is a Jewish fable or a pagan myth. I am perfectly capable of reasoning this out for myself without "credible, verifiable, historical evidence".
( I don't know which of the phrases - "credible, verifiable, historical evidence" or "presupposition and assumption" you will wear out first from your constant repeating of them.)


As I thought you can't answer the question. Glad to answer this as you as you answer me.

Of course I can, but I just plainly do not want to bother with it. My time is more valuable to me than that. And if you already know the answer, then why are you asking me? You are not making any sense.

Only when whatever someone says is not supported with some kind of evidence, scriptural, lexical, grammatical, and/or historical, such as your comment above, “The author most likely believed”

Well, sorry about that, but now I have clarified this for you, so your " 'enquiring' mind that wants to know" can now finally be at rest. :)

No, I did not miss anything. My understanding of what Clement said is just as valid as yours. It may well be that Clement, with nothing to prove otherwise, believed the myth, which proves absolutely nothing about his other views. I’m sure that we can find questionable comments in most of the ECF, they were all pagans before they were Christians.

It is obvious that he believed it. And why in the world would anyone who claimed to be learned in the teachings of Christianity need anything to "prove otherwise" ? It is incredible that you would make a statement like that.

If we throw out the views of the ECF then we have to throw out much of our understanding of koiné Greek. For example, Homer Philo, Josephus. Lucian, Hermippus, Ignatius, Aristotle, Pythagorus. Hermes. Suetonius, are all listed in the definition of θεος/theos in the Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker lexicon of NT Greek. Link to Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker lexicon online.

Nothing wrong with using such to enhance your understanding of koiné Greek. One does not have to agree with the commentator to take advantage of the 'historical linguistics' involved in their works.

What is your point? There was a church in Rome and it did have a bishop.

If the church was in Rome and it was Catholic, then it was a Roman Catholic church.

There were also churches, in Jerusalem, Alexandria, Babylon, and several other major cities and they all had bishops and none were an authority over the churches in other cities.

No one said they did.


You can check this for yourself in 1075, Pope Gregory VII “pronounced the title of ‘pope’ the sole and peculiar dignity of the Bishops of Rome. In his Dictatus Papae, he stated that the pope had the right to depose emperors, that the pope’s authority is the authority of Christ, that the papal office alone was universal in its authority.”

How does this relate to your comment that "There was no catholic church in Rome with a pope at its head until 1075 AD."? Just because Pope Gregory VII changed the name of the head of the church from Bishop to Pope doesn't change the fact that they were one and the same.
But really, I don't know what all of this has to do with the topic at hand ???


And your unsupported opinion, assumptions/presuppositions impress me not at all.

News Flash . . . . . I'm not trying to impress you.

The writings of the ECF is the historical evidence.

But where is the credible, verifiable, historical evidence that these men were who they are claimed to be or that they even wrote at all? And don't list anything relating to them that came after them, but I need something that preceded them; IOW I need a credible, verifiable, historical preface to their 'personages'.

Do you have anything other than your own opinion for rejecting Luke 16:19-1, and/or ECF?

Do you have anything other than your own opinion for accepting
Luke 16:19-1 and/or ECF?

I mean, after all, you can't truthfully say that Jesus was the one who said the words of the parable, can you?
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,575
6,063
EST
✟991,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
DER ALTER

If anything thats what you are doing with the verses you have selected; take them out of context; and those same verses do not state that a lost unrepentant person will suffer eternal torment for all of Eternity.

John 3:16 The Greek word for perish is Apollymi- to destroy In the context of this verse it is a contrast between life and Death...

False Accusation? I stated many false religons are started because of people twisiting scripture around. I believe ETD is wrong but it is not a religon...

Also Mathew 25- you state that the Eternal Punsishment means Eternal Torment; thats not correct; you changed an Eternal Punishment to an Eternal Punishing when stating the lost will suffer eternal torment forever...

"Eternal punishment" is not "eternal punishing?" I guess the people on Jesus' right hand will not live forever because they go away into "eternal life" not "eternal liiving?" You are twisting scripture, there is no such distinction either in Greek or English. If you think there is I'll be waiting for you to prove that.

Many who heard Jesus say "These shall go away into eternal punishment," the Sadduccees and their followers, did not believe in the resurrection. They knew that everybody died and that it was forever and it had nothing to do with punishment. When Jesus said eternal punshment they would not have understood that to refer to death.

Mat 22:23 The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,[Mar 12:18, Luk 20:27]

Act 23:8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both.

Justin Martyr [A.D. 110-165.]- Dialogue with Trypho

“‘Then these reap no advantage from their punishment, as it seems: moreover, I would say that they are not punished unless they are conscious of the punishment.’​
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,575
6,063
EST
✟991,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I don't need any as you say and say and say "credible, verifiable, historical evidence" that Luke 16:19-31 is a Jewish fable or a pagan myth. I am perfectly capable of reasoning this out for myself without "credible, verifiable, historical evidence".
( I don't know which of the phrases - "credible, verifiable, historical evidence" or "presupposition and assumption" you will wear out first from your constant repeating of them.)

So nothing but your own unsupported opinion. How much more of the NT do you throw out because it doesn't line up with your opinion?

It is obvious that he believed it. And why in the world would anyone who claimed to be learned in the teachings of Christianity need anything to "prove otherwise" ? It is incredible that you would make a statement like that.

Sorry this does not make any sense to me.

Nothing wrong with using such to enhance your understanding of koiné Greek. One does not have to agree with the commentator to take advantage of the 'historical linguistics' involved in their works.

Interesting concept pick and choose what is/is not correct based on your own unsupported opinion

If the church was in Rome and it was Catholic, then it was a Roman Catholic church.

How utterly ridiculous is this. The church which was located at Rome did not have any more authority than any other church. The churches at Jerusalem, ALexandria, etc. were also catholic that is [SIZE=+1]κατά ὅλος[/SIZE]/kata holos, according to the whole. It was not until 1075 when Gregory VII unilaterally usurped authority that anything resembling the RCC came into existence.

How does this relate to your comment that "There was no catholic church in Rome with a pope at its head until 1075 AD."? Just because Pope Gregory VII changed the name of the head of the church from Bishop to Pope doesn't change the fact that they were one and the same.
But really, I don't know what all of this has to do with the topic at hand ???

See comment immediately above.

But where is the credible, verifiable, historical evidence that these men were who they are claimed to be or that they even wrote at all? And don't list anything relating to them that came after them, but I need something that preceded them; IOW I need a credible, verifiable, historical preface to their 'personages'.

I will be glad to provide that as soon as you provide such evidence for your opinions, assumptions, and presuppositions which I have already challenged.

Do you have anything other than your own opinion for accepting
Luke 16:19-1 and/or ECF?
I mean, after all, you can't truthfully say that Jesus was the one who said the words of the parable, can you?

2000 thousand years +/- of church history. What do you have?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.