Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hebrews 9:27
Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment
The above scripture says absolutely nothing about eternal damnation or about people being lost forever if they do not believe before they die.
How many times was Israel judged by God and then afterward restored? Or King David? the idea that one cannot be saved after they are judged is to be found no where in the scriptures. You are adding to scripture as is your common practice, just like Sciotamicks. And neither of you agree on anything other than ET, which is really funny because you both contradict each other in your defense of ET, showing that one of you is certainly wrong in your argument, if not both.
The above passage is but one of the many scriptures that when taken together show that the above passage does indeed refer to eternal condemnation in the lake of fire for those who have rejected Christ. For those who have believed in Christ, the judgment refers to the Bema seat judgment which is entirely different from the Great White Throne judgment. Matthew 25:41,46; Revelation 20:10-15 or but two such passages which state that the unbeliever will go into the eternal fire. You attempt to isolate one passage from the rest of Scripture to deny what the word of God teaches.
Quote:
Hades is the grave, no where is scriptures is it said to be a prison, and only in the parable of Lazarus and the rich man does it appear to be one. But Jesus was speaking to the pharisees when he spoke the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, and the reason why Jesus spoke in parables was so that those who were listening would not be able to understand what he was saying, he was speaking in symbo0lic code, which you are unable to understand just like the pharisees were unable to understand.
No, Hades is not the grave. I have already shown in the link to the thread I previously did what Hades and Tartarus and gehenna are.
If the Parable of the rich man and Lazarus were not a parable, your above statement would still be false, as the rich man was repenting while he was in Hades, he was persuaded that he had lived wrong and he wanted to warn his brothers. That is the purpose of judgment, to persuade us of our wrongdoing and bring us to a knowledge of the truth. Some people are just stubborn and require more judgment than others.
No the rich man was not repenting. He made no comment about being given another chance. He simply asked to have some water to cool his tongue and asked that his brothers be warned so that they might not end up there. And as Jesus said in the story, if they will not believe Moses and the prophets they will not believe if someone rises from the dead.
Quote:
the reason why people will reject Christ at that time is because God will loose Satan from the pit, so that he can deceive them? Why would God let Satan deceive people so that they should reject him? Think about it for a little while ...
But after that God will create a new heavens and a new earth, and all will be made one together in Christ and will confess he is lord, and god will be all in all ...
The reason Satan will be able to deceive them is because they of their own volition, with Satan locked up and not able to influence them, will have refused to believe in Christ.
Unbelievers wil be eternally confined to the lake of fire. They will have no part in the eternal kingdom of God.
You have the dogmatists run to ground . . . they are spewing their rote "precepts and doctrines of men" in shotgun fashion hoping to hit something. But they have the wrong context (you know the one they keep asking you to keep in mind) . . . so none of it has any clout. They are shooting blind in a frantic frenzy. Witness sciota's outbursts about "LIES,LIES, LIES", etc. Time to let them calm down . . . they are our brothers despite their "blind minds" from reading the OT. 2 Corinthians 3:14-17
But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. 15But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. 16Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
Mystic,
You have once again shown us that you have no clue as to what the scripture you have provided means. The tablets represent the Old Covenant, which was a ministry of death written on stone (2 Cor 3). The New Covenant, on the other hand, is the gospel of grace which brings life, and is written on our hearts (Heb 8). Just as the New Covenant was veiled and hidden in the types and shadows of the Old Covenant, so the shape of the heart can be found “hidden” in the shape of the tablets. It can be seen etched and partially chiseled out to the tablets, indicating that when the veil of Moses (that shadowy portion of the Old Covenant) is removed, the heart (New Covenant) is revealed.
I am calm, so is Mike, that I am sure of, but it is the flagrant misuse and twisting of His word, that puts us on the offence. Save your, "I love you" schpeel.
(my prayers aren't real incense and the "smoke" doesn't make God choke )
Mine are...but they aren't choking God, they smell good....
You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for Godfromevery tribe and language and people and nation. You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign on the earth."
1 Tim 1:15 says, 'It is a trustworthy statement, deserving full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners...'
Are you saying that I must doubt my beliefs of the trustworthyness of Jesus Christ and that no scripture exists that tells me of that trustworthyness.
What will be meaningless is the contradiction you teach.
The FACT remains that you mangled scripture in your thread title and should apologize to the almighty for doing so.
But instead you expect someone to read your thread title and then read the actual scriptures in ANY translation and think that you are making a good case for sound biblical reasoning.
TRY as you might, you cannot disprove the trustworthyness of JESUS Christ and a Confession of JESUS AS LORD, scripture and not your mangling explanations of it trumps you every time.
I do not have to come up with shoddy rewrites of scripture in order to support my belief, YOU do and YOUR THREAD TITLE PROVES IT.
1 Tim 1:15 does not say that 'it is always trustworthy to confess Jesus as Lord'. That is a phrase of your own invention. It says the following. 'It is a trustworthy statement, deserving full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners...'
Jesus did come to save sinners. But apart from placing their faith in Christ they will not be saved. They will spend eternity in the lake of fire.
Salvation depends on faith in Christ. Many will never place their faith in Christ. They will be eternally lost.
To Mike, Forgive me for not quoting your post. I looked up the Greek for "should", however it never gives the singular meaning, only the meaning for "should bow" and "should confess". And in no way am I trying to debate, I just need some understanding and maybe clarification of a few things.
In the 10 & 11 verses is there a certain time in which every knee should and every tougue confess. Is it continuous now, always has or should be or only a point in time. Matt. 28:18 implies continuous because the name of Jesus always has and continues to have all power and authority.
Now if should has been changed from shall, does this imply "condition". Example; should bow , should confess because Jesus deserves all honor and glory. But not necessarily will. In no way am I trying to add or take away scripture, just truly seeking.
I have given what I found on "should and shall" below.
God Bless, Mercy
Philippians 2: 10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father. KJV 10That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Greek-should bow
Original Word: κάμπτω
Transliteration: kamptó
Phonetic Spelling: (kamp'-to)
Short Definition: bow
Exhaust. Concordance
Word Origin
from a prim. root kamp-
Definition
to bend
NASB Word Usage
bow (3), bowed (1). Should –auxiliary verb 1. pt. of shall.
2. (used to express condition):Were he to arrive, I should be pleased.
3. must; ought (used to indicate duty, propriety, or expediency): You should not do that.
4. would (used to make a statement less direct or blunt): I should think you would apologize.
Origin:
ME sholde, OE sc ( e ) olde; see shall —Can be confused: could, should, would (see usage note at this entry ). —Synonyms 3. See must1 . —Usage note Rules similar to those for choosing between shall and will have long been advanced for should and would, but again the rules have had little effect on usage. In most constructions, would is the auxiliary chosen regardless of the person of the subject: If our allies would support the move, we would abandon any claim to sovereignty. You would be surprised at the complexity of the directions. Because the main function of should in modern American English is to express duty, necessity, etc. ( You should get your flu shot before winter comes ), its use for other purposes, as to form a subjunctive, can produce ambiguity, at least initially: I should get my flu shot if I were you. Furthermore, should seems an affectation to many Americans when used in certain constructions quite common in British English: Had I been informed, I should (American would ) have called immediately. I should (American would ) really prefer a different arrangement. As with shall and will, most educated native speakers of American English do not follow the textbook rule in making a choice between should and would. See also shall. Shall –auxiliary verb, present singular 1st person shall, 2nd shall or ( Archaic ) shalt, 3rd shall, present plural shall; past singular 1st person should, 2nd should or ( Archaic ) shouldst or should·est, 3rd should, past plural should; imperative, infinitive, and participles lacking. 1. plan to, intend to, or expect to: I shall go later.
2. will have to, is determined to, or definitely will: You shall do it. He shall do it.
3. (in laws, directives, etc.) must; is or are obliged to: The meetings of the council shall be public.
4. (used interrogatively in questions, often in invitations): Shall we go?
Origin:
bef. 900; ME shal, OE sceal; c. OS skal, OHG scal, ON skal; cf. G soll, D zal
—Can be confused: can, may, shall, will (see usage note at can1 ; see usage note at this entry ; see synonym note at will2 ). —Usage note The traditional rule of usage guides dates from the 17th century and says that to denote future time shall is used in the first person ( I shall leave. We shall go ) and will in all other persons ( You will be there, won't you? He will drive us to the airport. They will not be at the meeting ). The rule continues that to express determination, will is used in the first person ( We will win the battle ) and shall in the other two persons ( You shall not bully us. They shall not pass ). Whether this rule was ever widely observed is doubtful. Today, will is used overwhelmingly in all three persons and in all types of speech and writing both for the simple future and to express determination. Shall has some use in all persons, chiefly in formal writing or speaking, to express determination: I shall return. We shall overcome. Shall also occurs in the language of laws and directives: All visitors shall observe posted regulations. Most educated native users of American English do not follow the textbook rule in making a choice between shall and will. See also should.
World English Dictionary should (ʃʊd) — vb See also shall the past tense of shall : used as an auxiliary verb to indicate that an action is considered by the speaker to be obligatory ( you should go ) or to form the subjunctive mood with I or we ( I should like to see you; if I should be late, go without me ) usage Should has, as its most common meaning in modern English, the sense ought as in I should go to the graduation, but I don't see how I can. However, the older sense of the subjunctive of shall is often used with I or we to indicate a more polite form than would: I should like to go, but I can't. In much speech and writing, should has been replaced by would in contexts of this kind, but it remains in formal English when a conditional subjunctive is used: should he choose to remain, he would be granted asylum
Mine are...but they aren't choking God, they smell good....
You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for Godfromevery tribe and language and people and nation. You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign on the earth."
Not all men.
Revelation is FAR from the end, sciotamicks. The elect ( who learned how to love~~many not even considering themselves Christian) from all ages will rule OVER the earth. For what purpose? What leads people to love God? His GOODNESS! His AGAPE LOVE. Most people have knowN down here is war, abuse, and chaos under the adversary.
The saints have a lot to do after they "die."
Last edited by herefornow; 08-18-2010 at 08:07 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
) shalt, 3rd shall, present plural shall; past singular 1st person should, 2nd should or ( Archaic 
