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.
You obviously think the lake of fire is eternal torment . Where does it say the lake of fire is eternal or even torment. This is why the traditions of men can be deceptive , especially when there doctrine is derived from the mistranslation of the scripture, of which i once was agreeable to. I was totally ignorant of the meaning of Gods judgement and fire and accredited it all to the unsaved man coming under the wrath of God then tossed into eternal torment how wrong was i.
It as been explained time and time again about Gods judgement and fire so i want take the liberty of explaining this to you.
If you have a problem with the likes of Hitler not burning in eternal torment take it up with God
I started a reply to I LOVE NC's post then changed my mind, it the back button , but i was going to ask the very same thing.
Happy about people going to hell? No it doesn't make me happy, it makes me very sad, just as the lies about hell not being eternal make me very sad, giving people flase hope, very sad.
You quoted my my statement of Biblical fact:
"Never are people directly said to be in the lake of fire."
and answered it saying:
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte
See, this is what prompted my other thread, "The Folly of Incorrect Biblical Translations."
It seems impossible that anyone could be so off; but, if I understand you properly, you actually think if the Bible doesn't fit your doctrine, then it is incorrect?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte
"If" is not found in the original KJV, which is, "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." The difference is night and day. This is why an incorrect, even deceptive Biblical translation can literally mean the difference between eternal life or death for a Christian.
First things first. Lest someone who can hear might misunderstand, " 'eternal' life" is not determined by one's understanding of Biblical information concerning eschatology, or the distant future. It is good, however, to grapple with the farthest view we have, which is "God, the All in all" (1 Cor 15:28)
Yes, the AV says "whosoever." Are you able to hear "whosoever" is a questioning pronoun unanswered and, only a possibility, indefinate unless answered in the passage, which it is not? How many whosoevers, any or none? But you say, " 'if' is not found in the original KJV..." which Bible version you in the immediately preceding labeled "incorrect" and a "folly." Actually, you are not quite right about "if" not being in the AV when the Greek occurrences of the underlying word are canvased. Here are the facts:
AV (with Strong's numbers) -- Rev 20:15 And 2532 whosoever 1536 was 2147 0 not 3756 found 2147 written 1125 in 1722 the book 976 of life 2222 was cast 906 into 1519 the lake 3041 of fire 4442.
The Greek is: ei teis and it is a pronoun.
According to Thayers Lexicon:ei is first a conditional particle, if; secondly, an interrogative particle, whether.
Authorized Transaltion (KJV) is 79 occurences.
AV (incidence of how translated) — if any man 35, if any 19, if a man 8, if any thing 6, if ought 3, whosoever 2, misc 6
(At a minimum, 73 out of 79 are translated with "if" as is also true for the controverted passage in many if not most other translations. "Whosoever" is only 2 times...versus 73 "ifs", indicating AV translator's preference.)
Probably been asked before but, would this also include the likes of Hitler, Stalin and Eichmann????
I think we run the risk of turning God into a cream puff. Is God capable of hate? Certainly He is! "Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated. If God is capable of hating someone, by extension doesn't it suggest He is perfectly capable of banishing that person(s) to eternal torment? I would think so.
Let's see, The Ultimate Psychotic Supreme Torturer, worse than any man or devil can be, the originator of unimaginable evil versus a cream puff. Which will I choose?
This question has been asked here and answered so often in forums where you post it only indicates the answers are not being read. That is an optimistic assumption. A heart hard against God is another possibility, His evidence in the Scripture and His witness to your conscience.
It tells right in Romans how to understand this "hatered" for Esau. It was in order for God to make known His ability to make a "choice," (The AV transliterates the Greek and calls it "election") and goes farther by stating it had nothing to do with what the man did. The birthright blessing, which included being an ancester of Jesus the Messiah, went to Jacob by God's prior decision. When we come to the end of Isaac's life, Jacob and Esau have been reconciled for some time, and together they bury their father. The idea what was meant was a pretermination of whether Esau was "saved" or not is not in the text.
Concerning Hitler, as well as the Jews who were His victims, Stalin, even you or me, to object to anyone's "salvation" is to deny God. Regardless of one's position on the extent of salvation -- all, some, or a few -- it is by grace through faith, not of ourselves. Even those that have been taught the world is not God's field, but His weedy wilderness, believe God could save a Hitler or an Alexander, or themselves, as they define salvation. Peter didn't say to Jesus, "I can't follow you because of that traitor Judas you chose to be among us, your twelve." Part of how it happens in people's minds is they flip-flop about what salvation is. For me it means being ever more changed into Christ's image and likeness; but, they think, for that bad person over there, salvation means to rescue their wicked life so they can go on sinning. If anybody is "saved," and it doesn't matter who it is, they are transformed. Just what the doctor ordered!
Last edited by JamesMRohde; 06-11-2009 at 02:34 PM..
Probably been asked before but, would this also include the likes of Hitler, Stalin and Eichmann????
I think we run the risk of turning God into a cream puff. Is God capable of hate? Certainly He is! "Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated. If God is capable of hating someone, by extension doesn't it suggest He is perfectly capable of banishing that person(s) to eternal torment? I would think so.
You know, your totally misinterpreting that scripture which is plainly resolved in the same chapter. That chapter is about God predestining men to a purpose. The very clear message of that chapter is what those of us who are claiming Gods eventual reconciliation of all things have been saying all along.
Lets take the chapter and break it down shall we?
<< Romans 9 >>
King James Bible
Quote:
1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, 2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. 3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
Ok, Paul here confesses his love for his kinsmen and his wish that he might be accursed on their account. He confirms that Christ himself was of Israeli decent at least where the flesh is concerned. He says something very important which will overshadow the rest of the entire chapter ... He tells us that Christ(God through Christ) is "over all". What does over "all mean"? We are clearly instructed as we shall see within the remainder of the chapter that "over all" refers to gods power of election over all men and over their lives.
Quote:
6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: 7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. 8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. 9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son. 10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; 11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth 12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
Paul then explains to us that regardless of fleshly descent, whether Jew or Gentile, our being "children of God" has to do with faith. That is to say the evidence(not the substance or cause) of our election as Gods children is our faith. In spite of carnal heritage, God chooses his children, and he chooses that some are will not be his children in the ages.
Note here verse 11 ...
11 "(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of Godaccording to electionmight stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )"
This is telling us that God preferred(loved) and elected Issac above Esau(hated) before birth and that it had absolutely nothing to do with their own actions. Indeed, we will later in the chapter see that it is God who hardens and softens the hearts of men that ultimately dictates their actions.
Quote:
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. 15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. 17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. 18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
Here we see Paul addressing the natural and rational question that comes to mind concerning the nature of God if indeed it is because of him that any man should be elected or disavowed. Paul answers this question by stating Gods righteousness is in his mercy, that he may have mercy on whom it pleases him to have mercy, not because they are worthy of it, but because it pleases him to do so, hence verse 16 ...
"16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy."
It is not of our desire or choice, it is not of our efforts or work, it is of God that what? That "sheweth mercy". What does God do? Does it say here it is of God that sheweth hatred? Or, of God that sheweth anger? or of God that sheweth vengeance? No, it is God who sheweth mercy, as we see throughout scripture to be the mystery of his will, to save(have mercy on) all men.
Next he Gives example of this fact, in that he claims responsibility for Pharaoh's disbelief and therefore for his actions; in order to magnify his name among the nations and show his power ...
"18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy(reveal himself to those whom he will reveal himself), and whom he will he hardeneth(cause to believe not)."
Quote:
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, 24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
Next Paul presents that next rational question that rises in the mind concerning Gods character if he is indeed finds fault in those whom he hardens. His answer is simple, That God creates vessels to honor and to dishonor. Those created to dishonor exist in order that he might make known his power, and make known his riches and his glory to those whom he has fitted to mercy.
So the reason God hardens mens hearts is in order to provide an example of evil whereby we(those who believe, vessels of mercy) might have a contrast whereby to know the goodness God.
Quote:
25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.
26 And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.
27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved: 28 For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.
29 And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.
30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. 31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
33 As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
Next we see that God will cause those who were no his beloved(who he once hated), and who were not his people to become his beloved people. That will be the eventual culmination of his will as we are told concerning it ...
1 Timothy 2:4
"Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."
and again ...
"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."
and yet again ...
John 12:32
"And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw(Greek : helkō - literally to drag) all men unto me."
And he tells us that in order to make his will done, which is to make those he once hated into his beloved people, he would have to cut his work in his already beloved people(Israel) short, though he would leave a remnant.
At last, we are told the fate of them whom he has hardened and cut short in this world, a fate which those who he has elected to show his mercy on throughout the ages will not suffer, that being shame. Notice it says nothing about eternal torture or hell here. What is necessary for those whom God hardens to feel shame? They will have to fully acknowledge their wrong doing. And in accepting that wrong which they had done they are ashamed. That is what we see happens to Nebuchadnezzar when God humbles him. But what does this shameful humiliation incur in the heart and soul and life of the king? His sanity and position are restored and he praises and honors God. Wow, what a surprise? This guy was as bad if not worse then Saddam Hussein, Hitler, and Stalin all rolled into one, yet through his judgment God redeemed him, and he praised God.
So what have we learned?
Last edited by Ironmaw1776; 06-11-2009 at 05:13 PM..
I LOVE NORTH CAROLINA --- on page 13 in post #122 of this thread you say: "the lies about hell not being eternal make me very sad, giving people flase hope..."
I noticed you around some of these discussions and I really would like to have an explanation. My curiosity on this point is painful and has lasted a long time: why do you keep using the word "hell?" It doesn't seem you'd initially be changing your doctrine much and you'd be more faithful to God. Is it true as I often suspect of many, you just don't defile yourself by reading what those you think are wrong have written? Maybe it seems too hard to do. More interesting to me would be why, in spite of the fall-off-a-log easy to obtain and verify for yourself nature of this information, you don't accept or utilize it.
I mean, the Bible facts are: 1.) in the N.T. there are several Greek words -- "gehenna, hades, tartarus" -- which have "hell" pasted over them in some translations. 2.)These words that the Holy Spirt chose to make His revelation know are spelled differently from one another and have very different meanings from oone another. 3.) There is nothing that unites these words in the original. There's no statement saying "hades is gehenna," or, "gehenna is tartarus," or something similar. These are not opinions about the facts, but are facts themselves. I didn't write the Bible.
For me, I would consider myself to misrepresent what God has spoken almost any time I used the word "hell" instead of the few so different from one another terms from the original. I have a conscience toward God, not to lie about Him or what He says. My rule is to make my confession of faith with the actual words God chose to make His revelation known.
Surely you know the easy to comprehend facts of God's Written revelation. Why keep saying "hell?" A person oriented to the Biblical categories wouldn't be sure what you meant. There are many differing concepts about just what is meant by someone saying "hell" and we can't go to Scripture as God gave it to us and make sense of the Biblical concepts out the confusion over English renderings. I want the truth. I want to have an intimate walk with God. How can somebody say they believe in God's Written Word but refuse to submit to using the word categories it uses for what they say? Yet they think they are telling what the Bible says. On the other hand, if they know what they are doing, why aren't they afraid? It just boggles my mind. Why wouldn't you say what thing you're talking about from God's word rather than use an English word that is a Biblically unwarranted amalgam of various God given terms plus some of Dante thrown in?
I have another rule I learned from Charles Finney's Biography: adjust to increasing light as rapidly as possible. Why do you keep using the term "hell?"
Last edited by JamesMRohde; 06-11-2009 at 10:25 PM..
But if man's trichotomy is not considered (as well as what scripture has to say about purging) then we fail to acknowledge God's purpose, much less His nature (heart).
Actually, I don't see where God separate his judgment between the trichotomy. Is there a reference where he deals with our soul one way while dealing with our spirit another and our body yet a third? I do believe God recognizes we are mind, body and spirit and that each has a different nature (flesh and spirit are always at war).
I do not think we need to understand man to understand God. Rather, I think unless we understand God we cannot adequately understand man.
I LOVE NORTH CAROLINA --- on page 13 in post #122 of this thread you say: "the lies about hell not being eternal make me very sad, giving people flase hope..."
I noticed you around some of these discussions and I really would like to have an explanation. My curiosity on this point is painful and has lasted a long time: why do you keep using the word "hell?" It doesn't seem you'd initially be changing your doctrine much and you'd be more faithful to God. Is it true as I often suspect of many, you just don't defile yourself by reading what those you think are wrong have written? Maybe it seems too hard to do. More interesting to me would be why, in spite of the fall-off-a-log easy to obtain and verify for yourself nature of this information, you don't accept or utilize it.
I mean, the Bible facts are: 1.) in the N.T. there are several Greek words -- "gehenna, hades, tartarus" -- which have "hell" pasted over them in some translations. 2.)These words that the Holy Spirt chose to make His revelation know are spelled differently from one another and have very different meanings from oone another. 3.) There is nothing that unites these words in the original. There's no statement saying "hades is gehenna," or, "gehenna is tartarus," or something similar. These are not opinions about the facts, but are facts themselves. I didn't write the Bible.
For me, I would consider myself to misrepresent what God has spoken almost any time I used the word "hell" instead of the few so different from one another terms from the original. I have a conscience toward God, not to lie about Him or what He says. My rule is to make my confession of faith with the actual words God chose to make His revelation known.
Surely you know the easy to comprehend facts of God's Written revelation. Why keep saying "hell?" A person oriented to the Biblical categories wouldn't be sure what you meant. There are many differing concepts about just what is meant by someone saying "hell" and we can't go to Scripture as God gave it to us and make sense of the Biblical concepts out the confusion over English renderings. I want the truth. I want to have an intimate walk with God. How can somebody say they believe in God's Written Word but refuse to submit to using the word categories it uses for what they say? Yet they think they are telling what the Bible says. On the other hand, if they know what they are doing, why aren't they afraid? It just boggles my mind. Why wouldn't you say what thing you're talking about from God's word rather than use an English word that is a Biblically unwarranted amalgam of various God given terms plus some of Dante thrown in?
I have another rule I learned from Charles Finney's Biography: adjust to increasing light as rapidly as possible. Why do you keep using the term "hell?"
What about the term "love". Nearly everyone in this post has used that word, but it is used to replace several "similar" words in the original text too.
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.
No it doesn't make me happy, it makes me very sad, just as the lies about hell not being eternal make me very sad, giving people flase hope, very sad.
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
