I believe in Jesus, but I cannot accept some mainstream Christian beliefs.

[it'sme]

Jesus said that if a man believed his words that he would never die.

John 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

This is the death that Jesus died for us, the one that we don't hve to experience if we believe in him. we shall never die the second death, not the first death.

Jesus agreed to take our place in the Lake of fire for all those who believe in him. the second death is the death that those who believe in Jesus will never die.

You've tried to with your faulty logic here, dismiss 1 pet. 3.20 that says Jesus preached to the unyielding at the time of Noah. dismissing scripture with logic isn't good. lots of people do it though. how can Jesus have preached to those who were unyielding in Noah.s day when you say they ceased to exist when they died? all I see is that you ignore the problem and pretend like it doesn't exist. saying spirits always live ignores the problem and doesn't address the problem. It ignores the fact that Jesus preached to those who were unyielding in Noah's day. you haven't explained it, if you are going to continue to insinuate that all christians are pagans and refuse to even acknowledge questions like these, then you have zero credibility. I can answer your questions, because I have the truth. You cannot answer my questions because you do not have the truth. you cannot answer as to why or how Jesus could preach to those who were unyielding in noah's day if as you say they ceased to exist when they died. A doctrine, like yours, that selectively ignores anything that contradicts it, isn't worth anything.

In John 11: 26 is talking about those that will never die at all. Noah and his family survived the flood. Noah's day pictures the time of the end, and just like then, there will be ones that survive that time. These ones survive have the opportunity never to die at all. These are the ones that survive Armageddon.
The second death, means no resurrection. There are some people that do get the second death, and have no change of a resurrection .

1 Peter 3:16 Hold a good conscience, so that in the particular in which YOU are spoken against they may get ashamed who are speaking slightingly of YOUR good conduct in connection with Christ. 17 For it is better to suffer because YOU are doing good, if the will of God wishes it, than because YOU are doing evil. 18 Why, even Christ died once for all time concerning sins, a righteous [person] for unrighteous ones, that he might lead YOU to God, he being put to death in the flesh, but being made alive in the spirit. 19 In this [state] also he went his way and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who had once been disobedient when the patience of God was waiting in Noah’s days, while the ark was being constructed, in which a few people, that is, eight souls, were carried safely through the water.

So this is saying even Jesus died.

In verse 19 these are the spirits ( demons) that were the disobedient ones at the time of the floodLuke 8:31 And they kept entreating him not to order them to go away into the abyss. 32 Now a herd of a considerable number of swine was feeding there on the mountain; so they entreated him to permit them to enter into those.

They know that Jesus had the power to imprison them, and they asked that he not do it now, so Jesus made them enter the swine.
So these were Satan's spirit creatures , not spirits of dead people.

 

[2ducklow]

In John 11: 26 is talking about those that will never die at all.

NO it isn't it's talking about those who believe in Jesus.

(Darby) John 11:26 and every one who lives and believes on me shall never die. Believest thou this?
it's talking about the second death, everyone who believes on Jesus will die the first death.

Noah and his family survived the flood. Noah's day pictures the time of the end, and just like then, there will be ones that survive that time. These ones survive have the opportunity never to die at all. These are the ones that survive Armageddon.
The second death, means no resurrection. There are some people that do get the second death, and have no change of a resurrection
Peter 3:16 Hold a good conscience, so that in the particular in which YOU are spoken against they may get ashamed who are speaking slightingly of YOUR good conduct in connection with Christ. 17 For it is better to suffer because YOU are doing good, if the will of God wishes it, than because YOU are doing evil. 18 Why, even Christ died once for all time concerning sins, a righteous [person] for unrighteous ones, that he might lead YOU to God, he being put to death in the flesh, but being made alive in the spirit. 19 In this [state] also he went his way and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who had once been disobedient when the patience of God was waiting in Noah’s days, while the ark was being constructed, in which a few people, that is, eight souls, were carried safely through the water.

So this is saying even Jesus died.

In verse 19 these are the spirits ( demons) that were the disobedient ones at the time of the floodLuke 8:31 And they kept entreating him not to order them to go away into the abyss. 32 Now a herd of a considerable number of swine was feeding there on the mountain; so they entreated him to permit them to enter into those.

They know that Jesus had the power to imprison them, and they asked that he not do it now, so Jesus made them enter the swine.
So these were Satan's spirit creatures , not spirits of dead people.

Jesus preached to demons? I cannot accept that. let's look at the verse again.

18 for Christ indeed has once suffered for sins, [the] just for [the] unjust, that he might bring us to God; being put to death in flesh, but made alive in [the] Spirit, 19 in which also going he preached to the spirits [which are] in prison, 20 heretofore disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in [the] days of Noah while the ark was preparing, into which few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water:

your version adds who to verse 20. it isn't in the Greek it is a translators interpretation. disobediant, IMO, refers to the souls who did not go into the ark, not to the spirits of those souls. It appears to me that the spirits are the human spirits of the people who did not go all the way with noah in building the ark but dropped out because it was such a long time building the ark (several hundred years or some such long time as that) they just got tired of it and left, just as people today in churches sometimes leave god and the church when they get tired of christianity after doing it for so long. Jesus went by the spirit and preached by the spirit to the human spirits that commmunicated Jesus message to the human souls that those spirits belonged to. your way you have Jesus preaching to demons, my way I have Jesus preaching to humans.

I find your contention that Jesus preached to demons unacceptable because demons can't be saved by Jesus death on the cross. In fact there are no scritpures supporting the doctrine that demons can repeant and be saved. that would be pure fantasy. So you're back to square one in explaining how Jesus could preach to those who were disobediant in noahs day if they ceased to exist when they died.

 

[2ducklow]

Epicurus also taught that there can be no life after death. This, of course, was contrary to the Bible’s teaching of the resurrection. In fact, when the apostle Paul spoke at the Areopagus, likely the Epicureans were among those who took issue with Paul over the doctrine of the resurrection.—Acts 17:18, 31, 32; 1 Corinthians 15:12-14.

No they didn't the epicurian religon began in like 300 B. C. hundreds of years before Paul.

Epicureanism is an ancient Greek philosophical system taught by Epicurus. It emphasized the goal of a happy and content life in the here and now, rejecting both superstitous fear of the gods and notions of an afterlife.
Though the modern use of the term "Epicurean" is associated with the saying, "Eat, drink and be merry," Epicureanism did not advocate simple pursuit of bodily pleasure and differed significantly from hedonism.
Fast Facts

• Date founded: c. 300 BC
• Place founded: Athens, Greece
• Founder: Epicurus (341-270 BC)

http://www.religionfacts.com/a-z-religion-index/epicureanism.htm

Ironically, while the Epicureans placed such emphasis on being happy, theirs was a limited happiness at best. Lacking “the joy of Jehovah,” Epicurus called life a “bitter gift.” (Nehemiah 8:10)

show me whre neh. 8.10 has Epicurus in it.

(Darby) Nehemiah 8:10 And he said to them, Go your way, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send portions to them for whom nothing is prepared; for the day is holy to our Lord; and be not grieved, for the joy of Jehovah is your strength.


How happy the early Christians were by comparison! Jesus was not recommending an unhappy life of self-deprivation. In fact, following his course is the way to the greatest happiness.—Matthew 5:3-12.[/qutoe] this has nothing to do with anything. the argument is that Jw's got their belief in no soulical after life from epicurians. the argument isn't what the value of epicurianism is. you're just throwing up a smoke screen.

We certainty don't think this life is all there is. We believe in the resurrection for those that die. But the bible teaches that there is no after life, in that spirits are something like that keeps on living.

None of the greek pagan religons believed in a resurrection, they all either believed in an afterlife or no afterlife, such as the epicurians. therefore JW"s coppied thier belief in no soulical after life from such religons as the epicurians. your argument that that can't be cause you believe in the resurrection and epicurians didn't is a non argument. It evades the point which is that you got your belief from epicurians. epicurians predate JW's. so that's where you got it from , pagansim.

 

[Kal Perry]

Lizzybeth,
Not all Christians believe in hell nor do Jews for that matter. Furthermore the word hell is Anglosaxon and in it's original form meant to cover or conceal. The Greek word Hades means exactly what the Hebrew word Sheol means and that is unseen an impreccetible, thus hell in the since of to cover or conceal was accurate in the 1500's when it was transliterated as such, it was not until the dark ages that hell was preverted.
Eternal, everlasting, for ever are from the Greek word Aion and and really do not imply endless time, but rather "long time" as in EON. You are correct God is Love but but do not be deceived God will not be mocked, I do not wish to imply any negativity by that statement just a warning to those of "us" that tend to question much and challange the status quo.
You strike me as a real thinker and someone who is creative in your thought, this is a real blessing but you must guard your thoughts from the enemy because this is an area that he would love to explore.
Know that you are not alone in your thoughts

quote=Lizzybeth9234;54310514]Hello there. Let me start by saying that I would define myself as someone that has a relationship with Jesus, not necessarily someone that calls themselves Christian, because my beliefs towards some common and mainstream tenants of Christianity make it so that I do not fall into the modern definition of a Christian. But, I am someone that has a relationship with Jesus... This is what I think of myself as. Someone that believes in and loves Jesus, regardless of whether others consider me a Christian or not.

I was born a Lutheran Christian, and had a very nice childhood, and all that jazz. But, when I reached my 20's, I began to have some serious problems with common themes held in Christianity.

Morality and logic cannot allow me to accept some of the common tenants of Christianity. Mainly, I cannot accept the concept of a 'hell', or an 'eternal' damnation, or even the idea that one has to profess a belief to someone in order to be 'saved', or that any sin we commit warrants said eternal damnation. I can't accept that believing in something is what dictates where someone ends up. There are also parts of the Bible that I cannot accept come from a loving God, the God I know. Another issue I have is the idea of Biblical inerrancy and the political influence over the Bible.

Please note I didn’t say any of this to start an argument. I know you will tell me that I'm wrong, and all of that, but it's still my belief. I don't believe that one person's beliefs are more valid than another's... because it's a relationship with Jesus I have, not with religion. Again... these are my own views. Please don't start trying to lecture me because of them. Thanks.

I have decided to read everything I can find for myself, including the Bible of course, but also non canon early Christian writings, other religious beliefs that support the idea of Jesus, NDE accounts, and my own meditation, to form a picture of Jesus for myself.

In the end, I have settled on a sort of Christian universalism. I take to heart the idea that God is love, and those that dwell in love dwell in God. I also believe in some non mainstream Christian beliefs, such as reincarnation, near death experiences, ghosts, and so on. So, for my own saneness, I have come to view Jesus as not just the title for the son of God, but for the literal love of God, or love itself. In other words, I believe that anyone that dwells in love dwells in Jesus and in God, even if they do not know Him by name or choose to call Him another name. When Jesus says He is the one way, the true way, I take that as meaning that following Jesus's teachings - specifically to love God and to love each other- not necessarily professing faith to a title, open a pathway to God. That, and dwelling in love, because God made love, and God is love (to me). If we do not dwell in love, we cannot have the path to God opened to us. So, when I myself say I accept Jesus as my savior, I am accepting his teachings, and love itself. This is my belief. Again, I really do not wish to start a debate or argument over it. I know it's not mainstream.

This is the only way my sense of morality and my own logic can allow me to be a Christian.

I know this is far different from how most people here approach Christianity, Christ, and religion, and please keep in mind I do not want to start an argument or a debate. I know you probably think that I’m wrong. I’m fine with that. Please don’t start threatening me with eternal hellfire. I only wish to know if there are any others here that have felt similar feelings to what I have described. [/quote]

 

[Der Alte]

Lizzybeth,
Not all Christians believe in hell nor do Jews for that matter. Furthermore the word hell is Anglosaxon and in it's original form meant to cover or conceal. The Greek word Hades means exactly what the Hebrew word Sheol means and that is unseen an impreccetible, thus hell in the since of to cover or conceal was accurate in the 1500's when it was transliterated as such, it was not until the dark ages that hell was preverted.[sic][ . . . ]

This is a misleading misrepresentation of historical fact. I don't know if it is deliberate or otherwise, but I do know that the truth is a mouse click away. Here is the 1st paragraph from a Jewish Encyclopedia article, I posted earlier in this thread, showing the Jewish view of Gehhena, from before Christ, as a place of eternal, i.e. unending punishment for the unrighteous.

Jewish Encyclopedia, GEHENNA

The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch was originally in the "valley of the son of Hinnom," to the south of Jerusalem (Josh. xv. 8, passim; II Kings xxiii. 10; Jer. ii. 23; vii. 31-32; xix. 6, 13-14). For this reason the valley was deemed to be accursed, and "Gehenna" therefore soon became a figurative equivalent for "hell." Hell, like paradise, was created by God (Sotah 22a); [Note this is according to the ancient Jews, long before the Christian era, NOT the bias of Christian translators.] according to Gen. R. ix. 9, the words "very good" in Gen. i. 31 refer to hell; hence the latter must have been created on the sixth day.

Link to article in this thread​

Eternal, everlasting, for ever are from the Greek word Aion and and really do not imply endless time, but rather "long time" as in EON.

See Jewish Encyclopedia article above.

I know this is far different from how most people here approach Christianity, Christ, and religion, and please keep in mind I do not want to start an argument or a debate. I know you probably think that I’m wrong. I’m fine with that. Please don’t start threatening me with eternal hellfire. I only wish to know if there are any others here that have felt similar feelings to what I have described.

Subjective "feelings" are a poor reason for believing anything.

 

[it'sme]

Subjective "feelings" are a poor reason for believing anything.

But Kal is correct in this, the word Hell has come to mean something different that what was originally meant. There is no Hell where live humans suffer. The feeling that God would not do that to people is backed up with the bible. If your dead you don't feel anything. If you think that people are alive after death as a sprit then they don't feel any literal fire either .
So ther is no place as Hell as a torture chamber etc. That is really a pagan belief.

 

[Der Alte]

But Kal is correct in this, the word Hell has come to mean something different that what was originally meant. There is no Hell where live humans suffer. The feeling that God would not do that to people is backed up with the bible. If your dead you don't feel anything. If you think that people are alive after death as a sprit then they don't feel any literal fire either .
So ther is no place as Hell as a torture chamber etc. That is really a pagan belief.

If a place of eternal, unending punishment is pagan why did Jesus use a story about a pagan belief in Luke 16:19-31? Why did God use two stories including pagan beliefs, Isa 14:9-11, Ezek 32:18-22? Why would either God or Jesus use what you call a pagan lie, at any time or for any purpose and NEVER explain that the stories were anything but the truth of God? I have read the excuses about symbolism, etc. but that is only the imagination of WTBS leaders and JW will believe anything their leaders tell them without question. There is NOT one single verse in the entire Bible which identifies these scriptures and anything but truth.

 

[it'sme]

If a place of eternal, unending punishment is pagan why did Jesus use a story about a pagan belief in Luke 16:19-31? Why did God use two stories including pagan beliefs, Isa 14:9-11, Ezek 32:18-22? Why would either God or Jesus use what you call a pagan lie, at any time or for any purpose and NEVER explain that the stories were anything but the truth of God? I have read the excuses about symbolism, etc. but that is only the imagination of WTBS leaders and JW will believe anything their leaders tell them without question. There is NOT one single verse in the entire Bible which identifies these scriptures and anything but truth.

The Pharisees were steeped in pagan beliefs, and believed in an after life. And it was written for our time, Jesus stated plainly to the Pharisees what he thought of them.
Besides Jehovah gives the understanding to who he wants to and keeps it from others. That has worked very well.
Also we use this language also,, we say of a son that has gone wild, that his father would roll over in his grave, if he knew what his son was doing. No one today believes that saying is real. It just means his father would be upset. This is the same in the bible.

 

[Der Alte]

The Pharisees were steeped in pagan beliefs, and believed in an after life. And it was written for our time, Jesus stated plainly to the Pharisees what he thought of them.

This is gossip and innuendo concocted by your anonymous writers at WTBS. There is NOT one vs. in the NT which says the Pharisees were steeped in pagan beliefs. You might as well be talking about little green men from Mars. There is no evidence for that either. What did Jesus say about the Pharisees?

Mat 23:2-8
(2) Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
(3) All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
(4) For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
(5) But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
(6) And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
(7) And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
(8) But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.​

Jesus did NOT say anything about the Pharisees being steeped in pagan beliefs. If anything they did had been pagan Jesus would certainly have said something.

Now you are claiming that Luk 16:19-3 was written for our time, before you said it had a double meaning one for the Jewish leaders of that day and another for our day. If it was written for our day whay would Jesus use pagan lies to commincate God's truth to us today.

Besides Jehovah gives the understanding to who he wants to and keeps it from others. That has worked very well.
Also we use this language also,, we say of a son that has gone wild, that his father would roll over in his grave, if he knew what his son was doing. No one today believes that saying is real. It just means his father would be upset. This is the same in the bible.

Right God gives understanding to whom he chooses and every Tom, Dick, and heretic around has a different explanation for the story of the rich nman and Lazarus and NO, ZERO, NONE of them have any scriptural basis, whatsoever. Since Jesus NEVER states that the story of the rich man and Lazarus is anything but factual, every explanation which tries to make the story symbolic, figurative, etc. is just wild imagination trying make the scripture support a particular religious assumption/presupposition.

You still have NOT given any plausible or scriptural explanation why God and Jesus would include what you claim is pagan beliefs, such as the dead in Sheol/Hades moving, speaking, feeling pain, etc. in the Bible and never identify the passages as symbolic, figurative, etc.

Whatever figures of speech we may or may not use, today in casual conversation, is irrelevant. Your example is called hyperbole, exaggeration for emphasis. There is a difference between a hyperbolic phrase and a lengthy story with actual Biblical persons being involved in what you and your leaders call a pagan lie.

 

[Kal Perry]

What the hell is Hell? First of all let me thank Der Adler for his fine points of references to Judaism concerning Hell and Gehenna, obviously you have invested much time in study. However you are incorrect concerning Judaism and their belief in Hell or Gehenna as "everlasting punishment. As I had said before Orthodox Jews do not believe in Hell, you could simply ask ANY Jewish Rabbi. Hell as a word was not originated until 725ad and in its original form meant to COVER or CONCEAL, Hades which is nothing more than the Greek word for Sheol which means UNSEEN and IMPRECEPTIBLE. It was not until the Dark Ages that this more provocative definition of hell in regards to torture fire and demons was applied.

I love to quote and debate scripture, however for this article I would prefer to ask questions, and make statements. If hell is a real place then who was the first person to enter? If Gehenna is the place where the worm dies not and the fire is never quenched why is it not burning today? Luke 16 "the rich man and Lazarus" If Jesus was referencing eternal hell, has anyone considered that Lazarus was Judged before Christ was Risen? How soon after Christ death burial and Resurrection did people begin to go to hell for their denial of Him? Did Indians in the North and South American Cont. immediatly begin to go to hell after Christ Ressurection, yet were able to go to Heaven before His Resurrection? Did Jews who died in the Holocaust at the hands of Hitler, (who was killing them ultimately for the Divine Will of God) after the Jews were starved, tortured, and brutally used for horrorific scientific experimentation, then gassed or mutilated to death having their bodies bulldozed into a ditch and covered, did these Jews receive their "real punishment" of everlasting hell for their rejection of Christ after their death? If a Chinise girl living in Hong Kong happens to hear Bennie Hinn on TBS preaching to a crowd of people, many of which are falling down and gyrating on the floor she then rejects this message and walks out of her house and is hit by a bus and killed, does she go to hell for the rejection of Christ? How many people in the history of mankind do you think have died never even hearing the name of Christ? Do all these people go to hell?

If Jesus says if He be lifted up He will draw ALL men unto Him, are all men drawn and then some do not receive the drawing? if so how does this account for all those who never heard of Christ? Why does Christianity teach an age of accountability? my bible says that even a child is known by his ways. Who is the youngest child in Hell? If an Atheist pregnant woman dies, does both she, and her fetus go to hell? Would it not of had been better to be born in the First Covenant a Jew than in the Second Covenant a Jew? If some deeply depressed man or woman who lost a child should so loose their will for life and committ suicide, do they spend eternity in Hell? If Jesus said that He came to destroy the works of the enemy, yet some 98% of mankind is spending eternity in Hell, can we really claim that the works of the enemy are destroyed? How is it that the Good Shepherd could search night and day for that lost sheep until he finds it but then after the Good shepherd has died and risen He know longer searches for the sheep until He finds it? The worst crime in the history of mankind was the crucifixion of Christ, when He was dying He looked at His murderers and said Father forgive them...Were they forgiven for this crime? perhaps they were forgiven for the murder and then rejected for their denial of Christ and then sentenced to eternal hell? why does Jesus say that to him that knows the Will of his Father and does not do it will be beaten with more stripes than the one who doesn't even know Him? Could there be levels to this punishment? A just punishment to fit the crime? Why would God create mankind, only to have most of them reject Him and be condemned to eternal Hell. If you had a child that was condemned to eternal Hell and had the ability to rescue them from this place would you? How much more must the Father of All, love His children! If silver, gold and precious stone, ,wood, hay and stubble are tried in the fire and whatever is not of God will be burned up, then if we as believers must be purified then how much more the unbeliever? If it is NOT God's Will that Any should perish but that ALL should come to the knowledge of the truth ESPECIALLY THOSE THAT BELIEVE, then can it not be said that even unbelievers will also come to the knowledge of the truth? Will God then, once they receive the truth Condemn them to eternal hell? If every knee is going to bow and every tongue is going to confess that Jesus is Lord all to the Glory of God, then why would He condemn them to eternal hell after their reconcilliation? was this not what the Lord was seeking from mankind? If by one man's sin many were made sinners (many has to be ALL, as in all have sinned and fall short of the Glory) so by the obedience of one (Jesus) shall many (must be ALL) be made righteous.

If the wages of sin is death, why do we teach that it is eternal hell? Why do we teach that Jews for their denial of Christ will spend eternity in hell? Clearly the bible teaches that all Israel will be saved! why did Paul say to hand one unto Satan so that his spirit might be saved in the end? Why do we teach that God is love and that Love never fails, yet believe that most of mankind will spend an eternity in hell? Why do we teach that as in Adam all die even so in Christ shall all be made alive, if we believe that most of mankind will burn in eternally in hell? you may have to meditate on that scripture a few hundred hours as I have before it registers.

Hell is not a correct translation of neither the Greek nor Hebrew scriptures, and many have tried to include Gehenna, Perdition or some other such word to justify eternal suffering. O death, where is thy sting? O HELL (grave) where is thy victory!

Der Adler you mis quoted me as if I was apologising for my position of belief, I am not now nor ever regretful for believing that God Loves mankind so much that he would not have any perish but that ALL would come to the knowledge of the truth.

All words here have been written in love whether you accept this understanding or not I am satisfied with it's contents.

 

[it'sme]

Josephus provides details concerning the beliefs of the Pharisees. He observes: “They believe that souls have power to survive death and that there are rewards and punishments under the earth for those who have led lives of virtue or vice: eternal imprisonment is the lot of evil souls, while the good souls receive an easy passage to a new life.” (Jewish Antiquities, XVIII, 14 [i, 3]) “Every soul, they maintain, is imperishable, but the soul of the good alone passes into another body, while the souls of the wicked suffer eternal punishment.” Regarding their ideas about fate or providence, Josephus reports: “[They] attribute everything to Fate and to God; they hold that to act rightly or otherwise rests, indeed, for the most part with men, but that in each action Fate co-operates.”—The Jewish War, II, 162, 163 (viii, 14).

 

[Der Alte]

What the hell is Hell? First of all let me thank Der Adler for his fine points of references to Judaism concerning Hell and Gehenna, obviously you have invested much time in study. However you are incorrect concerning Judaism and their belief in Hell or Gehenna as "everlasting punishment. As I had said before Orthodox Jews do not believe in Hell, you could simply ask ANY Jewish Rabbi. Hell as a word was not originated until 725ad and in its original form meant to COVER or CONCEAL, Hades which is nothing more than the Greek word for Sheol which means UNSEEN and IMPRECEPTIBLE. It was not until the Dark Ages that this more provocative definition of hell in regards to torture fire and demons was applied.

My name is Der Alter, it means "The Elder" in German and Yiddish. The opinions of modern Jews and their rabbis is irrelevant. The article I quoted is from the Jewish Encyclopedia published in 1917, edited by 35 + Jewish Rabbis and scholars and is a history of the Jewish beliefs in ancient times. I see a lot of this means this and that means that but I don't see any evidence.

Irrelevant questions omitted. Please deal with my post, not a lot of questions you think prove something or other. All your questions assume that the article I posted was something I wrote. Once again, it records the beliefs of the ancient Jews before and including the time of Christ.

Hell is not a correct translation of neither the Greek nor Hebrew scriptures, and many have tried to include Gehenna, Perdition or some other such word to justify eternal suffering. O death, where is thy sting? O HELL (grave) where is thy victory!

What the word hell may or may not have meant at some time or other is irrelevant. It is the meaning we understand today that is important. And the meaning we assign to the word is the same as the ancient Jews did to the word Gehenna, a place of eternal, unending punishment for the unrighteous. It does not matter that originally meant a valley. For example, the KJV has more than 800 words that have changed meaning and no longer mean what the translators intended, or dropped out of the language altogether but we still read it and understand it from the meaning of the words today.

Der Adler you mis quoted me as if I was apologising for my position of belief, I am not now nor ever regretful for believing that God Loves mankind so much that he would not have any perish but that ALL would come to the knowledge of the truth.

I did not misquote you and I said nothing about you apologizing. As for your allusion to God will not have any to perish. Note this passage from Jeremiah.

God said “I have caused to cleave” That word is הדבקתי/ha’dabaq’thi. It is in the perfect or completed sense. God’s will, expressly stated, for the whole house of Israel and Judah, not just an elect, predestined, chosen, few, was for all of Israel and all of Judah to cling to God as a belt clings to a man’s waist. It was done, finished, completed, in God’s sight, and, according to some arguments presented, nothing man can do will cause God’s will to not be done. But they, Israel and Judah, would not hear and obey, their will, vs. God’s will, So God destroyed them, vs. 14.

This passage very much speaks to the issue of salvation, God’s sovereign will, and man’s free will and agency. God stated very clearly what His will was, in terms that cannot be misunderstood. But, because the Israelites would not hear, and obey, God destroyed them, instead of them being unto God, “for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory, vs. 10.”

Jer 13:1 Thus saith the LORD unto me, Go and get thee a linen girdle, and put it upon thy loins, and put it not in water.
2 So I got a girdle according to the word of the LORD, and put it on my loins.
3 And the word of the LORD came unto me the second time, saying,
4 Take the girdle that thou hast got, which is upon thy loins, and arise, go to Euphrates, and hide it there in a hole of the rock.
5 So I went, and hid it by Euphrates, as the LORD commanded me.
6 And it came to pass after many days, that the LORD said unto me, Arise, go to Euphrates, and take the girdle from thence, which I commanded thee to hide there.
7 Then I went to Euphrates, and digged, and took the girdle from the place where I had hid it: and, behold, the girdle was marred, it was profitable for nothing.
8 Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
9 Thus saith the LORD, After this manner will I mar the pride of Judah, and the great pride of Jerusalem.
10 This evil people, which refuse to hear my words, which walk in the imagination of their heart, and walk after other gods, to serve them, and to worship them, shall even be as this girdle, which is good for nothing.
11 For as the girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man, so have I caused to cleave [הדבקתי/ha’dabaq’thi] unto me the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah[/b], saith the LORD; that they might be unto me for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory: but they would not hear.
[size=+1]• • •​

14 And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.​

Note, verse 14, God said He will NOT have pity, will NOT spare, and will NOT have mercy but destroy them.

H1692 דבק dabaq daw-bak'
A primitive root; properly to impinge, that is, cling or adhere; figuratively to catch by pursuit: - abide, fast, cleave (fast together), follow close (hard, after), be joined (together), keep (fast), overtake, pursue hard, stick, take.

H8816 Perfect

The Perfect expresses a completed action.

1) In reference to time, such an action may be:

1a) one just completed from the standpoint of the present
- "I have come" to tell you the news

1b) one completed in the more or less distant past in the beginning God "created"
- "I was (once) young" and "I have (now) grown old" but
- "I have not seen" a righteous man forsaken

1c) one already completed from the point of view of another past act
- God saw everything that "he had made"

1d) one completed from the point of view of another action yet future
- I will draw for thy camels also until "they have done" drinking

2) The perfect is often used where the present is employed in English.

2a) in the case of general truths or actions of frequent occurrence--truths or actions which have been often experienced or observed
- the grass "withereth"
- the sparrow "findeth" a house

2b) an action or attitude of the past may be continued into the present
"I stretch out" my hands to thee
"thou never forsakest" those who seek thee

2c) the perfect of intransitive verbs is used where English uses the present; The perfect in Hebrew in such a case emphasizes a condition which has come into "complete existence" and realization
- "I know" thou wilt be king
- "I hate" all workers of iniquity

2d) Sometimes in Hebrew, future events are conceived so vividly and so realistically that they are regarded as Having virtually taken place and are described by the perfect.

2d1) in promises, threats and language of contracts
- the field "give I" thee
- and if not, "I will take it"

2d2) prophetic language
- my people "is gone into captivity" (i.e. shall assuredly go).​

[/SIZE]

 

[Kal Perry]

Thank you Der Alter, your words were soundly heard and understood. I do not agree with them, however, I do appreciate the thought provoking scriptures you have quoted and your command of scripture is quite impressive! I think you see God much more regiment than I, this of course is not in and of itself bad or necessarily wrong. I on the other hand see God less regiment and perhaps more forgiving and certainly more understanding and compassionate on mankind!

Truly though I have enjoyed your wisdom and I thank you for your replies to my article. yours in Christ, Kal

 

[Der Alte]

Thank you Der Alter, your words were soundly heard and understood. I do not agree with them, however, I do appreciate the thought provoking scriptures you have quoted and your command of scripture is quite impressive! I think you see God much more regiment than I, this of course is not in and of itself bad or necessarily wrong. I on the other hand see God less regiment and perhaps more forgiving and certainly more understanding and compassionate on mankind!

Truly though I have enjoyed your wisdom and I thank you for your replies to my article. yours in Christ, Kal

This sounds like a cop out to me. I quoted a passage from the OT which contradicts your misunderstanding of 2Pet 3:9

2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.​

I see God how he is described in scripture, all scripture not just a few out-of-context proof texts, which appear to support your assumptions/presuppositions.

 

[Kal Perry]

"No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day." Jn. 6:44

(God) "Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to HIS OWN PURPOSE and GRACE, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the foundations of the world began." 2 Tim. 1:9

I believe your Old Test. scripture was not under Grace but rather under Law. I also would question how free a man's will is!

 

[Kal Perry]

My quote you had said was from 2 Pet. 3:9 I think it was actually from 1 Tim. 2:4 "Who will have ALL men to be saved, and to come into the knowledge of the truth."

John 12:32 "If I be lifted up from the earth, will draw ALL men unto me.

Phil. 2:13 "For it is God which works in you, both to WILL and to do HIS good pleasure."

1 Tim. 4:10 For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the saviour of ALL men, specially of those that believe."

John 3:17 "For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through Him might be saved."

I do not believe Christ will fail His mission. He came that He would destroy the works of the devil, currently we as Christians have the devil destroying the works of Christ, if most of mankind is condemned to eternal punishment.

 

[Der Alte]

[ . . . ]I believe your Old Test. scripture was not under Grace but rather under Law. I also would question how free a man's will is!

Whether you talk about law or grace, when God says he is going to or has done something, according to your universalist argument nothing man can say or do will alter the will of God. I posted a passage of scripture where God said, "So have I caused to cleave [הדבקתי/ha’dabaq’thi] unto me the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah[/b], saith the LORD; that they might be unto me for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory: but they would not hear." The words that God used were the most direct and emphatic way he could say that it was done, finished. But because they would not hear, listen and obey, God, he said, "I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them."

So when Paul says in the NT it is not God's will that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. That is true it is not his will but men can still choose to disobey God and like the house of Israel and Judah, in Jeremiah, when they do God will not pity, will not spare, and will not have mercy but destroy them.

 

[Kal Perry]

As usual you have made a valid point, one worth consideration, I am at work currently but will respond tonite!

 

[it'sme]

So when Paul says in the NT it is not God's will that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. That is true it is not his will but men can still choose to disobey God and like the house of Israel and Judah, in Jeremiah, when they do God will not pity, will not spare, and will not have mercy but destroy them.

It's not often I agree with you Der Alter, but this is correct. Though I would like to ask you a question, about this. If Jehovah destroys a person, what happens to that person. I'm thinking like the ones in Noahs' day, and Sodom and Gomorrah , etc?

 

[Kal Perry]

Jeremiah 13:14 "And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them."

Destroy is taken from Strong's 7843 and it means:
1) to destroy, corrupt, go to ruin, decay
a) (Niphal) to be marred, be spoiled, be corrupted, be corrupt, be injured, be ruined, be rotted
b) (Piel)
1) to spoil, ruin
2) to pervert, corrupt, deal corruptly (morally)
c) (Hiphil)
1) to spoil, ruin, destroy
2) to pervert, corrupt (morally)
3) destroyer (participle)
d) (Hophal) spoiled, ruined (participle)

What is really interesting is that this word "DESTROY" is the same word SHACHATH used in Genesis 18 and 19, that God said he would DESTROY, SHACHATH Sodom. se Gen 18, and 19 it is used some 9 times.
I could be mistaken concerning what you are saying in your interpretation of Jer.13 but I believe you are saying that it was the will of God to destroy Israel?
O.K. with that said, luke 10, "But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerable in that day for Sodom, than for that city."
More tolerable for Sodom who was destroyed! How could this be if they were SHACHATH, destroyed?
This destruction certainly cannot be annihiliation nor can it be eternal, further more it does not imply that there is nNO hope for SODOM. I say this because their punishment will not be as severe as as certain other cities. obviously there is degrees to punishment.