I give up.

armothe · Mar 11, 2003

Today at 02:52 AM EveOfGrace said this in Post #72 This was rather interesting: Ok, i am with you on the first part, the bible does say Jesus went to Hades and preached to them before He came back out of His tomb. He really is righteous and fair.  But i dont understand the part about Hades not existing anymore.  Where do the dead non believers go now?  And if Death and Hades is thrown into the lake of fire, where is Hades presently? EveOfGrace

JesusServant (and other admin) has been more than gracious in allowing my past references regarding Preterism to remain in this thread.
I don't really want to jeopardize having this thread shut down by posting Preterist doctrine.

However, I am really excited about what I believe and would love to PM you sometime if you like.
In the meantime, here is an outline of Preterism:

http://planetpreterist.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=5

There are a lot of other good resources on the above site as well.

-A

Rize · Mar 11, 2003

Today at 09:36 AM armothe said this in Post #80

You see, now we are getting into speculation on the nature of the afterlife. A different plan of Salvation? I suppose anything is possible, but I'll just stick with what the Bible says regarding the Second Death and put my personal feelings aside.

-A

You misunderstood.  I said a different system, not a different plan.  I'm hardly certain as to what the current "system" is.  Grace, through faith (whose?) as a "free" gift.  Grace sounds like something that could be received in different ways.  Thus, a different system of bestowing the grace of Christ to individuals may be possible or even necessary.

As for "feelings", we're supposed to listen to our consciences in regard to what is and isn't sinful.  If our conscience says that we shouldn't eat certain foods (even though God made all foods clean), then it is sinful for us to eat them. 

My conscience forces me to reject eternal torment.

armothe · Mar 11, 2003

Today at 04:04 PM Rize said this in Post #82
You misunderstood.  I said a different system, not a different plan.  I'm hardly certain as to what the current "system" is.  Grace, through faith (whose?) as a "free" gift.  Grace sounds like something that could be received in different ways.  Thus, a different system of bestowing the grace of Christ to individuals may be possible or even necessary.

I must have misunderstood, because I totally do not understand what you are saying. I thought "system" and "plan" virtually mean the same thing:

One entry found for system
Entry Word: system
Function: noun
Text: 1 an organized integrated whole made up of diverse but interrelated and interdependent parts <the capitalist system>
Synonyms: ORDER, method, orderliness, pattern, plan

Or perhaps you aren't being clear enough?

Today at 04:04 PM Rize said this in Post #82
As for "feelings", we're supposed to listen to our consciences in regard to what is and isn't sinful.  If our conscience says that we shouldn't eat certain foods (even though God made all foods clean), then it is sinful for us to eat them.  My conscience forces me to reject eternal torment.

Click to expand...

Hrm, well, I'll read the Bible and listen to what God says is and isn't sinful.
There are plenty of people who believe their conscience says homosexuality isn't a sin - are they right?

You can't always rely on the conscience. The only reliable truth we have in this world is the Bible.

-A
(V)

Rize · Mar 11, 2003

I'm just saying that things may be a little different while being fundamentally the same.

As for our conscience, it only decides on matters where the Bible is silent or neutral. Where the Bible seems to contradict our conscience, we have to either assume we're wrong, or that there is a misunderstanding. I, for example, have found plenty of ground for rejecting the idea that everlasting torment is a Biblical doctrine.

EveOfGrace · Mar 11, 2003

All of these 'ists' and 'isms' and 'pres' and 'mids' leave me

!

I will just stick with my bible and my Savior and stay away from sects and doctrines that take learning certain doctrinal gospels of which i am not familiar. Speculation as to what may or may not be a reality is pointless. Openning the door to 'possibilties' will only leave my soul vulnerable to being tossed to and fro by winds that blow in various directions. I dont find the need to rewrite the bible to understand what it already sais, even if i dont 'feel' fuzzy and warm about every concept or truth written therein. The truth is not meant to be pleasant to ears, but instead, beneficial to growth and awareness of what true love really means. Its not an emotion, its life giving spirit that often slaps us in the face in order that we may take a breath.

Rize i hope your interviews go well. May you dwell in peace, and the favor and blessing of God as you enter into each one. 

EveOfGrace

Rize · Mar 12, 2003

Thanks.  Just keep your eyes open.

Follower of Christ · Mar 15, 2003

"I do believe that everyone will be saved eventually. This does not mean that anyone will avoid judgment, or that no one goes to Hell. It simply means that Hell is not a place where God tortures people forever because He just can't figure out something better to do with them"

FOC:

OUCH !
I tend to take my bible just as its written.

Rize · Mar 15, 2003

Today at 10:17 AM Follower of Christ said this in Post #87

"I do believe that everyone will be saved eventually. This does not mean that anyone will avoid judgment, or that no one goes to Hell. It simply means that Hell is not a place where God tortures people forever because He just can't figure out something better to do with them"

FOC:

OUCH !
I tend to take my bible just as its written.

Sorry, I've lost my faith in the Bible as the word of God

Jesus is the word of God (John 1:1).  The Bible is a translation of scripture!  Unless you're reading the original Greek.  But even then, you're not reading it with 1st century Greek eyes and understanding.

So, I think of the Bible as very useful, but something to be used in conjunction with the Spirit of Truth.

Pericles · Mar 16, 2003

Yesterday at 02:40 PM Rize said this in Post #88

Sorry, I've lost my faith in the Bible as the word of God

Jesus is the word of God (John 1:1).  The Bible is a translation of scripture!  Unless you're reading the original Greek.  But even then, you're not reading it with 1st century Greek eyes and understanding.

So, I think of the Bible as very useful, but something to be used in conjunction with the Spirit of Truth.

Ouch...that has to hurt.  Let's see, what is worse, a post that denies the inspiration of the Bible, or a post that enforces it, but disagrees with the timing of the return of Christ?! 

Rize · Mar 16, 2003

I did not deny the inspiration of the Bible, just the inspiration of its translations.

EveOfGrace · Mar 17, 2003

I am wonderring......2Tim3:16 sais: All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Does ALL Scripture there mean only the original 'human language' it was first transcribed in or could God possibly be mighty enough to preserve His inspired written (theopneustos=God breathed) word to include ALL, even translations into various languages?  Could the preservation also include the various references available to man to find the original language meaning?

He sais in Psalms He preserves it forever.

I personally beleive He did.

Rize i am saddened that you don't.

Is it an accident that the Holy Scriptures, rightly named, have endured through all these generations and still have the power to convict a sinner, set free a captive, quicken a soul, divide light from dark and renew a mind?  Mere words of men cannot do that.

EveOfGrace

 

 

 

 

 

Rize · Mar 18, 2003

But various translations contradict each other.  And individual translations contradict themselves.  For example, 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings are part of one big epic.  1 and 2 Chronicles covers much of the same ground from a different perspective (much like the 4 gospel accounts, but not exactly).  Now, there are contradictions in numbers between these texts (due to scribal errors).  I don't know of any translation that picks one of the two numbers and uses it in both places.  Why?  Because it would be an arbitrary choice.  The translators know that they aren't inspired.  If a translator did arbitrarily choose one of the two numbers, would that suddently make the translation inspired?

I don't know what else "God breathed" could mean other than the original copies in their original language since there are differences in the later copies and translations.

References to the scriptures in the New Testament were references either to the original Hebrew copies, or the Greek translation (the Septuagint or LXX) which was written by Hebrew scholars fluent in both languages.  I wouldn't expect the LXX to be perfect, but would be very accurate.  Even enough to refer to it as "God breathed" even if that description isn't entirely accurate.

Our translations of the Bible are like a lamp shade over a light.  Though the light source itself is not seen, the light still shines through the lamp shade.  The light is changed and the amount of light that penetrates the shade is less or more depending on the type and quality of shade.  The image seen also varies with the perception and physical capability of the person who sees it.  But the shade is never in any circumstances the same as the original light source.

Even when we take off the shade and look at the lightbulb (original languages) we still cannot clearly see the fillament that actually creates the light because it is behind the glass of the bulb (sometimes frosted) and it's too bright.

The bottom line is that God did not preserve the scriptures in the manner you suggested.  It simply is not consistent with reality.

I know a guy who believes that the KJV is inspired.  He probably thinks that God would not bother to have the Bible written if He weren't going to protect it perfectly.  The grave mistake these people make is in thinking that God wants them to use a "handbook" to learn.  The Bible itself says that we must discern "spiritually".  We can only learn truth partially from the Bible.  Without the understanding given by God Himself, it will not help anything.  This is clear from the countless contradictory doctrines that various denominations come up with.

It would be nice if we had a perfect copy and translation of the Bible, but we don't.  So what remains is serious study to recover as much of the original message as possible, and our prayers for God's assistance.

Ezra · Mar 18, 2003

It simply is not consistent with reality.-- Universalist

If by "reality" you mean humanistic, rationalistic, reality, then you're right. But if you begin with the premise that God transcends nature and reason and everything He says and does is "suprarational" (above and beyond rational) then its quite easy to believe that the very words of the Lord God Almighty given be Divine Inspiration [God breathing His words into the prophet's or apostle's heart, mind and soul] have been preserved in the BODY of manuscripts represented by the traditional Hebrew and Greek trxts [the Masoretic OT and the Majority NT]. BTW the LXX is a corruption of the Hebrew Bible and does not have the authority of the Masoretic Text. The Biblia Hebraica of Rudolf Kittel pretends to be the Masoretic Text but is full of conjectural emendations made by rationalistic scholarship. The Greek Test of Westcott and Hort, now known as the Nestle-Aland Text or an Eclectic Text, is based on primarily a handful of ancient corrupt manuscripts known as "Codex B and its allies". Hence modern bible versions are the corrupted Word of God. To call the KJV "inspired" is incorrect, but to call it the most faithful English translation in common use is absolutely correct. If you ignore the italicised words, you have an almost word for word translation of the Hebrew and Greek. Today's versions use "dynamic equivalence" instead of faithful word-for-word equivalence, which means that they are paraphrases. This is the reason various translations "contradict each other". That's precisely what Satan wants, and Christians have swallowed his lies without stopping to think carefully about the consequences of Word contradicting Word.

To return to your concept of reality, is God's Plan of Salvation through the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ rational in any human way? Everthing about Christ is irrational -- He is both God and Man. He both died and rose again. He both lives in the believer and sits on His throne at the Father's right hand. Is any of this reasonable, rational or connected to ordinary reality?

Rize · Mar 19, 2003

Yesterday at 06:08 PM Ezra said this in Post #93

It simply is not consistent with reality.-- Universalist

If by "reality" you mean humanistic, rationalistic, reality, then you're right. But if you begin with the premise that God transcends nature and reason and everything He says and does is "suprarational" (above and beyond rational) then its quite easy to believe that the very words of the Lord God Almighty given be Divine Inspiration [God breathing His words into the prophet's or apostle's heart, mind and soul] have been preserved in the BODY of manuscripts represented by the traditional Hebrew and Greek trxts [the Masoretic OT and the Majority NT]. BTW the LXX is a corruption of the Hebrew Bible and does not have the authority of the Masoretic Text. The Biblia Hebraica of Rudolf Kittel pretends to be the Masoretic Text but is full of conjectural emendations made by rationalistic scholarship. The Greek Test of Westcott and Hort, now known as the Nestle-Aland Text or an Eclectic Text, is based on primarily a handful of ancient corrupt manuscripts known as "Codex B and its allies". Hence modern bible versions are the corrupted Word of God. To call the KJV "inspired" is incorrect, but to call it the most faithful English translation in common use is absolutely correct. If you ignore the italicised words, you have an almost word for word translation of the Hebrew and Greek. Today's versions use "dynamic equivalence" instead of faithful word-for-word equivalence, which means that they are paraphrases. This is the reason various translations "contradict each other". That's precisely what Satan wants, and Christians have swallowed his lies without stopping to think carefully about the consequences of Word contradicting Word.

To return to your concept of reality, is God's Plan of Salvation through the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ rational in any human way? Everthing about Christ is irrational -- He is both God and Man. He both died and rose again. He both lives in the believer and sits on His throne at the Father's right hand. Is any of this reasonable, rational or connected to ordinary reality?

Ezra, if you think that the KJV is the best translation, you're sorely mistaken.  The KJV has it's own share of contradictions due to translation flaws.  A "dynamic equivalence" Bible, while not ideal, can be very helpful for those who have trouble reading.  If you want a true word for word translation of the Bible, try Young's Literal or the Rotherham's Emphasized Bible.  There are others as well.

As for "my concept of reality", what does that have to do with any of the questions you asked?  Some things are spiritual, some things are physical.  Some things are difficult for us to comprehend, and some things aren't.

It isn't very difficult to know that God will not torture anyone forever (or even allow someone to "self-torment" forever).  If He did, He would not be God (much less God as described in the Bible).

If it weren't forced into most Bible translations, no Christian would believe in Hell as it is commonly believed in.  They would reject it as sadistic without a moment's thought as silly.  Any attempt to prove that it is true by searching the original languages would be dismissed because of the sheer silliness of the idea.  Our loving God torturing people forever... bah.  But we've been trained to believe it because it is so clear in the "word".

EveOfGrace · Mar 21, 2003

If He did, He would not be God (much less God as described in the Bible).

The God described in the bible flooded the earth to rid it of 'the wickedness of men' and drowned them all alive.  He destroyed Sadom and Gomorrah and burned its ihabitants alive because of the evil they had done. He annointed David to kill a giant and slice his head off.  He sent His own Son to die a horrible cruel death and did not stop it but in fact, turned away.

The God of the bible hates evil and does not embrace it.  Now or ever.  Sin and those who practice it do so apart from God. If that is sadistic by an stretch of the imagination, so be it. Children of the devil will not inherit the kingdom of God.  No amount of human emotion or logical pity can change it.

 

     

Rize · Mar 21, 2003

Yahweh is the God who can kill and make alive again. The good news was preached to the "Spirits" of Noah's day after Jesus died. That He brings any earthly judgment says nothing about whether or not he would torment people forever.

"Children of the devil will not inherit the kingdom of God. No amount of human emotion or logical pity can change it."

Don't ever forget that you were a child of the devil once. The Bible is very clear that no evil can enter the Kingdom of Heaven (whatever that is; a nod to the preterists here). That does not mean that children of the devil will remain so forever.

EveOfGrace · Mar 21, 2003

That does not mean that children of the devil will remain so forever.

 Nicodemus asked Jesus: What must i do to enter the kingdom? Jesus reply: You must be born again. The entire passage explains to Nicodemus that by believing one is saved. And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.    My question: How can one be born again, of the Spirit, by believing, after the world is judged?  biblical answer please, no inventions or maybes or what ifs.

 

 

Rize · Mar 22, 2003

How is it possible that there is a time limit on being born again?  Biblical answer please.

In other words, there isn't a strong case that accepting Jesus cannot happen after death, and there isn't a strong case that it can.  There are some scriptures that suggest in each direction, but no firm conclusion can be reached.

My only question is, how could it not be true if 1 Corinthians 15:22 is true?  And all the other scriptures like it.

EveOfGrace · Mar 22, 2003

Rize the scriptures i just posted from John did place a time limit.  Being born of the Spirit, here on earth. For God so loved the WORLD that He gave...that whoseover believes......... .  Verse 12 sais: If i have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe heavenly things?  Believing is done through FAITH. Not sight. If you have a red car, and show it to someone they dont 'believe' it is red, they see it. Seeing is not believing, seeing is manifest.  Jesus was sent into the world, to save the world.  After judgement of the world, its existance as we know it ends. In fact, that is where your 'age of ages' begins.

1Cor 15:22 is bodily resurrection, which every single human, past, present and future from this point, recieves. No man escapes judgement by simply 'dying'  as stated in verse 32. All men will recieve an eternal, spiritual body.  How can a spiritual body, immortal and eternal, standing before Jesus Christ, beleive by faith, and be born of the Spirit?  When the resurrection of the dead, all humans, takes place and all recieve that spiritual body, the state of the soul at the point of the death of that body, is what determines the 'order' or class(tagma)to which it belongs. If belonging to the order(tagma)of the firstfruits(Christs) they rise first to inherit the kingdom. The order(class) of the rest(not in Christ)rise last, to judgement of the wicked. End of sin. End of the 'world' system.  

How much more of a firm conclusion does God have to give us? Even with your rewording of scripture by the use of 'ages of ages' or 'perpetual age' it still is not the age of this world.  And no other plan is offered in scripture for salvation in that 'age of ages'. But punishment by fire and final separation(second death) IS stated. Death is destroyed so there remains no more sacrifice in the ages of ages.

Why is it so hard to believe that some people do in fact choose to be separate from God and even as far away from Him as they can possibly get?  Have you never encountered people that claim to be servants of satan rather proudly and confess boldly to hating God?  Even kids, as in columbine High School, hated Christ so much that they killed His saints. Are you going to tell me 'they didnt know'?  Rize the NWO is coming, the beast will rise and war will break out by haters and blasphemers(not ignorants) of God against His saints to destroy them in order to eliminate Gods plan altogether. Will you tell me also that they 'arent fully aware'? 

 Take a bite out of our present reality for a moment and taste the bitterness against the God of whom you serve and then tell me God will save them, even though they CHOOSE not to be anywhere near Him and in fact CHOOSE to abhor Him and all that belong to Him. Will our loving God force them to submit? Will He torture them into service?  Is it possible for Love to trap its prey in a lake of fire and dangle the carrot of freedom as a means to save them? Will they love Him then truly or just repent for the carrot?  Or does God prove His love by allowing the ungodly to remain 'un-godly'? 

You are dangerously imagining God as a torturer, having some sort of bent reasonning to torment wicked souls in pleasure when actually He has no pleasure in it and we are given ample opportunity to come home and know His Love. If it is rejected, God will still, in that Love, honor those who decided to go their separate way. Do we dare say God is sadistic for allowing the rebellious to rebel?  For casting the evil away from Him where they completely desire to be?  For letting them eat the fruit they picked?  God is not mocked, whatsoever a man sows, that shall he reap.  He is Love, and love includes just reward. 

When all is said and done, God simply lets the evil remain as they wish and captures no one.

The love you suggest, is forced freedom. There is no such thing.

EveOfGrace 

  

  

Rize · Mar 23, 2003

What do the numerous scriptures about believing and faith have to do with a time limit?  Observe.

"Seeing is not believing, seeing is manifest."

Jesus to Thomas:  "because you have seen, you have believed, blessed are those who have not seen, yet believe."

Are you calling Jesus a liar?

"Why is it so hard to believe that some people do in fact choose to be separate from God and even as far away from Him as they can possibly get?  Have you never encountered people that claim to be servants of satan rather proudly and confess boldly to hating God?"

They may be as such now, but no one can resist the love of God forever.  Free will or not, it is not in our nature or ability.  In the same way that our free will does not allow us to flap our arms and fly, our free will not allow us to reject God forever.

Love never fails.

"Take a bite out of our present reality for a moment and taste the bitterness against the God of whom you serve and then tell me God will save them, even though they CHOOSE not to be anywhere near Him and in fact CHOOSE to abhor Him and all that belong to Him."

Romans 5:8
But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

God loves the two children who shot up Columbine, even if we don't.

"You are dangerously imagining God as a torturer, having some sort of bent reasonning to torment wicked souls in pleasure when actually He has no pleasure in it and we are given ample opportunity to come home and know His Love."

You are dangerously imagining God as a torturer, having no reason at all to torment wicked souls, yet powerless not to.

Or are you?

If you don't tell me how I imagine God, I won't tell you how you imagine God.

I imagine God as a loving Father who will correct his wayward children until they do not need to be corrected anymore.  God uses fire to symbolize this, but I don't believe it will actually be literal fire.  Whatever it is, it will be done in love because God is love.

"God is not mocked, whatsoever a man sows, that shall he reap."

No one can sow (work) and reap everlasting life/pleasure.  So who can sow and then reap everlasting torment?  A person who sows spiritual things will reap spiritual rewards which are permanent.  A person who sows non-spiritual things will reap temporal rewards which will ultimately be consumed (1 Corinthians 3:10-15).

"The love you suggest, is forced freedom. There is no such thing."

The freedom you suggest is rife with limitations and so is not truly freedom in the first place.

The love I suggest is the very nature of God.  It does not fail.  God desires that everyone be saved, and His love will by no means fail.  Everyone will be saved, whether you want to believe it or not

I give up.

Living in HIS kingdom...

Well-Known Member

Living in HIS kingdom...

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Literal 6 Day Creationist<br />''An Evening and a

Well-Known Member

Christian

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads