1 Corinthians 15:1-8 - The Gospel That Saves (Tanakh, Messiah, suicide)
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.
We are all drawn one way or the other by what appeals to us. Look what happened in the garden with Eve, was she forced or drawn by what she thought was appealing ?. So how important it is that we see understand what we set our attention on we attract. Set your affections on things above the scriptures says the scriptures. As far as i am concerned there is no eternal hell above, and neither would such a thought come from above, so why even consider something that is not from above. That's another thing Eve consider something that did not come from above.
When the man/woman saw that the tree of knowledge was good for food and pleasing to the eyes; and that it was desirable for obtaining wisdom, they took the fruit and ate of it. For everything that is in the world: the desire of the body, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life are not from the Father (above) but these are from the world (below). And the world below was concocted by men in their quest for knowledge and wisdom, but they lacked understanding the things that come from above.
When the man/woman saw that the tree of knowledge was good for food and pleasing to the eyes; and that it was desirable for obtaining wisdom, they took the fruit and ate of it. For everything that is in the world: the desire of the body, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life are not from the Father (above) but these are from the world (below). And the world below was concocted by men in their quest for knowledge and wisdom, but they lacked understanding the things that come from above.
Scripture tells us that Jesus Christ is the wisdom of God. But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. Sounds like the one who had exact imprint of the nature of God to me
The world tells us it is the bible
Jesus himself said a greater one than Solomon was here, so it seems obvious to me that it is Jesus is the one by we test all things.
That it says perish in one scripture and something else in another.
If you were to set aside "the rules are the rules" for a bit does it seem reasonable to you that mistakes/misunderstanding/whatever made in this short span of max 100 years should be punished eternally or rewarded eternally? I know all that about lean not on your own understanding but just asking for your opinion. In order for this eternal reward/separation to be valid you have to disregard every other religion but Christianity. You have to believe that all those other people are somehow deserving of being separated from God for really not much. How do you reconcile that?
Here's the thing. You see the English word 'perish,' in John 3:16 and you form a mental image of what that means. Some English translations use the word 'lost.' The Greek word is ἀπόλλυμι - apollumi. Or as it appears in John 3:16 - μὴ ἀπόληται - should not perish.
The word apollumi has a range of meaning.
In Matthew 9:17 apollumi is used for wineskin being ruined or destroyed.
In Matthew 10:6 apollumi refers to the lost sheep of Israel. Physically, the lost sheep of Israel are alive, but they are in a state of spiritual separation of God, as are we all before coming to Jesus for salvation.
In Luke 15:24 apollumi refers to the Prodigal Son who was lost. He was physically alive but not doing very well in his lost state, and ended up being rather miserable which prompted him to return home.
So in John 3:16 the word apollumi is used with regard to those who shall not perish if they believe in Jesus Christ. Those who believe in Jesus will have eternal life. Those who don't believe in Jesus will perish - apollumi. But as seen, apolumi doesn't always mean 'destroyed' in the sense of being annihilated. It can refer to someone or something that is 'lost' but still alive.
In Daniel 12:2 we see that while everyone is resurrected, some are resurrected to eternal life while others are resurrected to disgrace and everlasting contempt. In John 5:29 some are resurrected to life while others are resurrected to judgment. In Revelation 19:20-20:10 we see the beast and the false prophet still alive in the lake of fire after having been there for a 1000 years.
There's more than one way of saying a thing. What the Bible teaches is a resurrection of all men, but some are resurrected to eternal life while others are resurrected to disgrace, contempt, judgment, and everlasting separation from God.
What is the lake of fire like? Well we can't really say because the Bible doesn't go into any detail about it. But one thing to notice is that in the parable of Lazarus and the rich man in Luke 16, while it is not talking about the lake of fire but of hades, we see the rich man ''in this flame.'' While he says he's in agony, he is nevertheless carrying on a normal conversation with Abraham and simply asks for a drop of water to cool his tongue. That's not exactly a picture reminiscent of something out of Dante's infernal.
Also, the lake of fire is referred to as the 'outer darkness,' which if taken literally doesn't seem to be compatible with a lake of fire.
I believe based on what the Bible says, that the essence of eternal punishment is separation from God. The Bible does imply that there will be degrees of punishment based on how much light a person had and rejected. This might mean different degrees of mental anguish and regret.
And we aren't eternally punished for our sins. The only sin we were ever judged for is Adam's original sin. Our own personal sins were all judicially imputed to Jesus as He hung on the cross and took the punishment that was due us.
The reason the punishment/separation is everlasting is because when sin entered into the human race it resulted in the human race entering into a fallen state in which man's best righteousness cannot measure up to God's perfect righteousness. There is no compatibility between God's perfect and absolute righteousness and man's imperfect and relative righteousness. Therefore man in his fallen condition cannot have an eternal relationship with God. Even though our sins were paid for on the cross, we are still in a fallen condition. That is why when a person places his faith in Jesus, he is imputed or credited with the perfect righteousness of Jesus and pronounced justified and qualified to enter into an eternal relationship with God. Romans chapters 3-5 talk about being imputed with the righteousness of Christ through faith in Him.
We are all drawn one way or the other by what appeals to us. Look what happened in the garden with Eve, was she forced or drawn by what she thought was appealing ?. So how important it is that we see understand what we set our attention on we attract. Set your affections on things above the scriptures say the scriptures. As far as I am concerned there is no eternal hell above, and neither would such a thought come from above, so why even consider something that is not from above. That's another thing Eve consider something that did not come from above.
This is so true, pcamps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerwade
When the man/woman saw that the tree of knowledge was good for food and pleasing to the eyes; and that it was desirable for obtaining wisdom, they took the fruit and ate of it. For everything that is in the world: the desire of the body, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life are not from the Father (above) but these are from the world (below). And the world below was concocted by men in their quest for knowledge and wisdom, but they lacked understanding the things that come from above.
Amen, Jer!
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcamps
Scripture tells us that Jesus Christ is the wisdom of God. But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. Sounds like the one who had exact imprint of the nature of God to me
The world tells us it is the bible
Jesus himself said a greater one than Solomon was here, so it seems obvious to me that it is Jesus is the one by we test all things.
You would think that the preeminence of Jesus would be a no-brainer for Christians, pcamps. It is amazing that it is not in so many ways. The Bible has become the Idol or God for far too many Christians placing Jesus in a subordinate role.
Jesus is the Savior so we have nothing to do with it, yet the Bible believers would have us play the deciding role in our salvation, NOT Jesus.
The Bible tells us that God will send a Comforter in Christ's name to teach us all things Jesus taught and to guide us to the Truth God has "written in our hearts," yet the Bible believers rely on the words "written in ink" and the "precepts and doctrines of men" derived from them instead.
Despite all their protestations, the Bible that only tells us ABOUT Jesus has become their God and replaced the guide God and Jesus actually promised us IN the Bible.
You would think that the preeminence of Jesus would be a no-brainer for Christians, pcamps. It is amazing that it is not in so many ways. The Bible has become the Idol or God for far too many Christians placing Jesus in a subordinate role.
Jesus is the Savior so we have nothing to do with it, yet the Bible believers would have us play the deciding role in our salvation, NOT Jesus.
The Bible tells us that God will send a Comforter in Christ's name to teach us all things Jesus taught and to guide us to the Truth God has "written in our hearts," yet the Bible believers rely on the words "written in ink" and the "precepts and doctrines of men" derived from them instead.
Despite all their protestations, the Bible that only tells us ABOUT Jesus has become their God and replaced the guide God and Jesus actually promised us IN the Bible.
The Comforter hasn't taught you anything. In the same breath, you rely on something the Bible says about the Comforter, and then immediately proceed to complain about 'Bible believers' relying on the words 'written in ink'.
We have to believe in Christ in order to be saved and Acts 16:31 is one such passage which tells us so.
The Comforter hasn't taught you anything. In the same breath, you rely on something the Bible says about the Comforter, and then immediately proceed to complain about 'Bible believers' relying on the words 'written in ink'.
We have to believe in Christ in order to be saved and Acts 16:31 is one such passage which tells us so.
Acts 16
31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.”
So does that now cover the believers family even if they are not a believer? It does say to believe in Jesus not the words of other men about Jesus.
Acts 16
31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.”
So does that now cover the believers family even if they are not a believer? It does say to believe in Jesus not the words of other men about Jesus.
No. Their statement was contingent upon the jailer's family also believing the gospel message. If you read further you see that Paul and Silas also gave the gospel to the jailers family and they believed and were saved.
No. Their statement was contingent upon the jailer's family also believing the gospel message. If you read further you see that Paul and Silas also gave the gospel to the jailers family and they believed and were saved.
The Comforter hasn't taught you anything. In the same breath, you rely on something the Bible says about the Comforter, and then immediately proceed to complain about 'Bible believers' relying on the words 'written in ink'.
We have to believe in Christ in order to be saved and Acts 16:is one is one such passage which tells us so.
You have imputed the condition " in order to be saved " when it simply means believe Him.
After considering the conversation I've concluded either you guys or myself are struggling with the concept of fairness; I'm not sure which. Probably me though because that has been the toughest thing I've had to deal with since concluding the likelihood of a sentient, involved creator is low. I know we can all appreciate that life isn't fair but I always though God would fix that somehow. I'd like to think in a perfect world there would be fairness. What you are presenting to me as perfect fairness cuts right through my core values. And it cuts through your core values to question that it would be (so it looks to me).
Dead on. we have covered the conundrum and talked about how some pertinent words are translated, but in the end it comes down to the nature of God and the inconsistency of what has to be called revenge with what is described as love. One side makes room in the nature of God for that inconsistency based on what they believe to be authority and the other either disputes the conclusions drawn from that authority, disputes that the instrument actually IS authority or both, but maintains that the character of God MUST be consistent.
On a related question, citing that disputed instrument may be for the purpose of showing inconsistency in the presentation of the other side OR as underpinning a point of application of the character of God to an issue, BUT the value of that citation will always be subject to confirmation of the guiding Spirit.
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.
