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.
Dear Ashultz73 I thought I'd collect a few statements from you and post them here:
In the very first post which you started off the whole thread on "The" you state: "Now I ask you of the unpardonable sin. Let us first go to Matthew 12"
Then you state in the same post here:
"Again no use of unpardonable at all and that it shall not be forgiven. "
So which is it? You begin this whole thread of posts in the very first thread saying the sin is unpardonable and then in post 72 you say there is no such sin as an unpardonable sin that it is an unforgivable sin.
Let us suppose the sin will not be forgiven. Jesus gives the limits of it not being forgiven. He said (according to some translations) "And whoever may speak a word against the Son of Man it shall be forgiven to him, but whoever may speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this age, nor in that which is coming." (Matthew 12:32 YLT)
What if Jesus said: If you do this I will not forgive you in this week or next week but you are going to have to pay for what you did in those two weeks.
Obviously the sin is going to be eventually forgiven because it is God: "who doth will all humans to be saved, and to come to the full knowledge of the truth; for one is God, one also is mediator of God and of men, the man Christ Jesus, who did give himself a ransom for all--the testimony in its own times--" (1 Timothy 2:4-6 YLT)
You can't shift the responsibility to the human if they will be saved or not in the above verse. The above verse is why God will save all humans based upon Christ ransoming all humans.
It is too late. All humans have been ransomed. They can't unransom themselves. Look through the whole Old Testament for the word "ransom" and take note that every animal and ever human that was ransomed HAD TO BE FREED! There were no "ifs" "ands" or "buts" about it. They could not unransom themselves.
I know, I know, you can say all manner of trite things against this post but ultimately you have to come to the truth that all humans have been ransomed and based on THAT ransom (not based upon what man chooses) but based on THAT ransom, all humans will be saved. There is just no way around this. It cannot be disproven.
Dear Ashultz73 I thought I'd collect a few statements from you and post them here:
In the very first post which you started off the whole thread on "The" you state: "Now I ask you of the unpardonable sin. Let us first go to Matthew 12"
Then you state in the same post here:
"Again no use of unpardonable at all and that it shall not be forgiven. "
So which is it? You begin this whole thread of posts in the very first thread saying the sin is unpardonable and then in post 72 you say there is no such sin as an unpardonable sin that it is an unforgivable sin.
Let us suppose the sin will not be forgiven. Jesus gives the limits of it not being forgiven. He said (according to some translations) "And whoever may speak a word against the Son of Man it shall be forgiven to him, but whoever may speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this age, nor in that which is coming." (Matthew 12:32 YLT)
What if Jesus said: If you do this I will not forgive you in this week or next week but you are going to have to pay for what you did in those two weeks.
Obviously the sin is going to be eventually forgiven because it is God: "who doth will all humans to be saved, and to come to the full knowledge of the truth; for one is God, one also is mediator of God and of men, the man Christ Jesus, who did give himself a ransom for all--the testimony in its own times--" (1 Timothy 2:4-6 YLT)
You can't shift the responsibility to the human if they will be saved or not in the above verse. The above verse is why God will save all humans based upon Christ ransoming all humans.
It is too late. All humans have been ransomed. They can't unransom themselves. Look through the whole Old Testament for the word "ransom" and take note that every animal and ever human that was ransomed HAD TO BE FREED! There were no "ifs" "ands" or "buts" about it. They could not unransom themselves.
I know, I know, you can say all manner of trite things against this post but ultimately you have to come to the truth that all humans have been ransomed and based on THAT ransom (not based upon what man chooses) but based on THAT ransom, all humans will be saved. There is just no way around this. It cannot be disproven.
It is disproven. There is nothing you have stated that says otherwise. You are twisting words because you fail to see I have called it The Unpardonable Sin by title, not by what is used in scripture. If you actually read what I have said, I have clearly said it is not the title I am addressing, but the words in scripture.
In your post of my blathering ignorance you went off on tangets of ages and such which I have also clearly refuted. Your use of eons is at best a reach and nothing more. The scripture you quote from and others is subject to more arguement than the very Bibles I have posted here.
In short you are correct there are no if, ands, or buts. You have proven nothing, but what others like you want to believe.
That is correct Aschultz73 you don't have a clue. You put a link to Matt Slick's web site against Universalism. I imagine you did that thinking his arguments are unanswerable.
Try to educate yourself a little and learn what others believe. We've already walked in your shoes.
Also, I noticed a few posts back Miss Shawn tried to show that "all" does not mean absolutely "all" by posting some scriptures which can show "all" in a limited way. As if we don't know all can be used in a limited way! But this does not disprove that "all" is often used in an all inclusive way.
"Even as in Adam all are dying" (1 Cor.15:22). Care to limit that all?
How about Colossians 1:15-20. If you are going to limit the "all" that are going to be reconciled then you must limit the "alls" in the verses before that verse. I'd like to see you do that.
In Romans 5:18 Paul wrote about due to what Adam did that all mankind were condemned. If you are going to limit the next "all" in verse 18 then you must limit the first all that all were not condemned due to what Adam did.
In Romans 5:12 is "all" limited? No.
Now I dont have a clue LOL. Sir you are quite like the poached egg C.S. Lewis spoke of. Im not bothering with you anymore you clearly assume you are of superior knowledge with your words. I stated I dont like doing this, but I used what is accepted by many greater authorities than you on the subject.
I have more important things to do then go back and forth with you over concepts that have been repeatedly rehashed and refuted over a 2000 year span. I have made my case and there is not one thing you have tossed out there that can change that.
You claim I have walked in my own shoes and you are right. I have done some horrible things to people that the Bible forbids and condemns. Thus I have come out of that. I have witnessed to out on this forum in public and full view to see. It is because of these sins I engage you, not because like you I think I have found a truth.
I am educating. I am in college for these things. I dont have a job thanks to the current world economy. For years now I have been studying. You want education, come join me in class. Perhaps you might learn something instead of accusing which is all you have resorted to in your last few posts.
blathering ignorance and no clue
Terms I have not used till now, because I am educated. But as C.S Lewis clearly stated in whatever way you see fit Mr Educated, there are a few poached eggs. You clearly show you are one.
P.S. I acknowledged Ghenna just a few short posts ago. If you took the time to read you would see I was aware of it and also that again I have not posted on ET. I have stated it a number of times, but again I must have no clue and ignorant blather. In fact I might not be educated as you LOL. Again I chuckle.
I tire of this discussion and I thank Legoman and Thy Kingdom Come for the engagement. Also I would like to thank them for not engaging in ET as I clearly did not intend to engage it here. Of course I see numerous threads on it elsewhere at this time, how interesting it continued to be brought up here.
But in short Lego and Kingdom Come it has been good to research these issues with you.
It is disproven. There is nothing you have stated that says otherwise. You are twisting words because you fail to see I have called it The Unpardonable Sin by title, not by what is used in scripture. If you actually read what I have said, I have clearly said it is not the title I am addressing, but the words in scripture.
In your post of my blathering ignorance you went off on tangets of ages and such which I have also clearly refuted. Your use of eons is at best a reach and nothing more. The scripture you quote from and others is subject to more arguement than the very Bibles I have posted here.
In short you are correct there are no if, ands, or buts. You have proven nothing, but what others like you want to believe.
But what I have written is not disproven. It is so easy to just, with the wave of the hand, dismiss those you cannot agree with and state they are wrong and reaching.
And for you to state these things have been dealt with for the last 2000 years proves nothing as well. Remember, the greatest theologians of the church believed and taught geocentric cosmology to the detriment of those who opposed and taught heliocentric cosmology. So claiming that majority or agedness of opposition being on your side proves anything, is an error in logic.
You brought up Matt Slick's web pages against universalism, not me and not the Universalists.
I am sorry if I hurt your feelings by anything I've written.
I am also sorry that you are at a stage in your life that you just can't learn anything from me.
Also, getting an education is no guarantee to a greater realization of the truth.
As to "clueless" and "reaching" you were the first one to accuse me of that I believe. Anyway, whatever!
I tire of this discussion and I thank Legoman and Thy Kingdom Come for the engagement. Also I would like to thank them for not engaging in ET as I clearly did not intend to engage it here. Of course I see numerous threads on it elsewhere at this time, how interesting it continued to be brought up here.
But in short Lego and Kingdom Come it has been good to research these issues with you.
Thanks for your courteous manner Aschultz, I appreciate the discussion as well. I encourage you to continue studying (I'm sure you will), I believe God will lead us both where we need to be.
I don't have much time legoman because I am leaving town tomorrow but I have to mention that I spent almost an hour if not more reading and studying Revelation last night. There is just no way that hell and eternal punishment do not exist.. Sorry, but you are very mislead and you are blinded to the Truth and even more pathetic and frightening is the fact that Revelation states clearly in the very last chapter that ANYONE who adds or subtracts to the book will add or subtract to himself all the punishment and distruction/ or blessings that are going to take place...
John the author of the book was a reliable witness and the book of Revelation is just that a "Revelation" from God to a Godly chosen man....
Take heed that you go to the Father and the True Jesus and ask Him to search your heart...
For God is not mocked....truly whatever a man sows he shall reap...
Hi Raelyn,
I hope all goes well with your sister.
I will just comment on Revelations, I have spent more than a few hours myself pouring over that book. It seems you believe Revelations speaks clearly on an eternal hell... that is very debatable. Are you aware that Revelations is NOT a revelation of Hell? It is also not a Revelation of John.
It is a revelation of Jesus Christ, who is, was, and will be. Revelations reveals who Jesus is and what He does, what He has done, what He will do.
The very first verse Rev 1:1 tells us this Revelation is signified - meaning a book of symbols. People have debated for centuries what these symbols mean exactly. Look at some of the symbols:
- God punishes the church of Ephesius by removing a candlestick
- people eating from a tree of life
- a sword comes out of Christ's mouth
- a woman rides a scarlet beast
- a beast with ten horns
- a sea of glass
- stars fall to the earth
etc.
These things are obviously symbols for something... the whole book is symbols, but for what is the question. Why do you assume the lake of fire (a symbol) means a literal eternal hell?
This stuff is not easy to understand when taken literally, because it is not meant to be taken literally. I found this article to be very useful in beginning to understand Revelations: L. Ray Smith - The Lake of Fire - Part 1
But what I have written is not disproven. It is so easy to just, with the wave of the hand, dismiss those you cannot agree with and state they are wrong and reaching.
And for you to state these things have been dealt with for the last 2000 years proves nothing as well. Remember, the greatest theologians of the church believed and taught geocentric cosmology to the detriment of those who opposed and taught heliocentric cosmology. So claiming that majority or agedness of opposition being on your side proves anything, is an error in logic.
You brought up Matt Slick's web pages against universalism, not me and not the Universalists.
I am sorry if I hurt your feelings by anything I've written.
I am also sorry that you are at a stage in your life that you just can't learn anything from me.
Also, getting an education is no guarantee to a greater realization of the truth.
As to "clueless" and "reaching" you were the first one to accuse me of that I believe. Anyway, whatever!
Goodbye. Peace and Poached eggs!
You could not hurt my feelings. What you do not understand is I have your links with your webpages. I know the author they come from. Im sorry if you feel like I discount you. Im sorry if you dont like Matt Slick. I also have the links you posted that rebutt him. The point is IM aware of both sides of the story.
I spent some today with a Jewish Rabbi talking about Gehenna. You point to uneducation that I cant learn from you. The fact is I have the information before me.
Let me break it down again. I have no job all I have is scripture in my life. Perhaps you dont understand that there is more to what I list here then a simple forum.
But let me give you some food for thought since you and others want to address ET. I am not convinced it exists. Because of some of the very translations you list, but did you know that some Jews believe that some souls will be permanently destroyed too? Did you know most Jews do not subscribe to hell? Before you judge the origin of this post that it ultimately leads to ET, perhaps you might realize what you consider rehashed on this forum, does not mean I am of the same cloth.
Just a thought. And by the way I love poached eggs.
P.S. On a side note some of the concepts you call easy to prove come from certain sources that have long been considered to have a rudimentary of what they translate, but not a mastery. Before you claim yours is superior understand the very accusation to the King James Bible are easily cast back. Not to accuse you, but the street goes both ways.
I will just comment on Revelations, I have spent more than a few hours myself pouring over that book. It seems you believe Revelations speaks clearly on an eternal hell... that is very debatable. Are you aware that Revelations is NOT a revelation of Hell? It is also not a Revelation of John.
It is a revelation of Jesus Christ, who is, was, and will be. Revelations reveals who Jesus is and what He does, what He has done, what He will do.
The very first verse Rev 1:1 tells us this Revelation is signified - meaning a book of symbols. People have debated for centuries what these symbols mean exactly. Look at some of the symbols:
- God punishes the church of Ephesius by removing a candlestick
- people eating from a tree of life
- a sword comes out of Christ's mouth
- a woman rides a scarlet beast
- a beast with ten horns
- a sea of glass
- stars fall to the earth
etc.
These things are obviously symbols for something... the whole book is symbols, but for what is the question. Why do you assume the lake of fire (a symbol) means a literal eternal hell?
This stuff is not easy to understand when taken literally, because it is not meant to be taken literally. I found this article to be very useful in beginning to understand Revelations: L. Ray Smith - The Lake of Fire - Part 1
No offense Lego but this post needs addressing...
Famous TV preachers like John Hagee tell us that "...every boy and every girl who dies without knowing Jesus Christ spends an eternity in a city where the fire is never quenched and the worm dieth not." And Mr. Hagee adds, "AND IT’S JUSTICE!"
Now I am not a John Hagee master, but I have never heard him say a boy or girl who dies burns in fire. In fact any well grounded Christian who heard this be said would know better. It is statements such as this that make one lose credibility. I am aware of L. Ray Smith, but I can find nothing where this could be supported. This is just a casual observation.
And on a side note I do agree with him on the idea of literalness, but I disagree of when and where. I would encourage you to study the Jewish concept of Gehenna alittle bit more. Jews dont even believe in Hell. You see I tend to go to the source which is the Jewish ideas. Some Jews see that truly evil people will not survive the idea of Gehenna, but be burned up and away as dust. Even the Jews are unsure of this.
On a side note I find the Hell to be more of a Greek concept than a Jewish concept and this on subjects like this I tend to go to a deeper source then simply the Greek. This is why when one translates Greek to me I take it with a grain of salt. I hope you can understand what I mean.
People tried to get me to engage ET a bit, thinking me a main stream Christian so to speak. I hope now you can see there is a clear reason why I have not engaged it.
...
So in closing what happens to one who blasphemes the Holy Spirit, or one who tastes that of Christ and then falls away. What happens to them? Can what is listed as being unforgiveable be forgiven?
May The Lord God Jesus Christ find you in Truth
Backsliding is always forgiven if one walks away -as I did- and returns, "taking words as sacrifices". You cannot crucify Christ twice, which is why Moses had to die before entering the promised land, because He struck the rock a second time, after the forty years wandering in the wilderness, which rock represented Christ, as an oracle; and from which they had got water at the beginning of their journey.
At the end of wandering in the wilderness, when they were thirsty, Moses was instructed to "speak to the rock" for water. Of course Moses' death was an oracle to warn of the eternal death for those who deny that Christ cleansed them the first time they came to Him, and who go astray into false ways, denying His name and salvation which they had received; and Moses did not suffer eternal death and his body was raised and he is with Elijah in that body in which he is returning to be the witness, so his death was just a warning to all who would "strike the Rock" twice.
I know a man who was born a believer in Jesus as a child and went astray as a young adult, into all manner of religions, rejecting Christianity as his parents practiced it [really materialistic and unloving persons, they were]. After his wanderings in many religions and after many nights over the years of repeated dreams of weeping because of something precious that he had lost -and he suspected it meant his relationship to Jesus, but was too stubborn to admit it, he said-he wanted to return to his faith in Jesus which he had known as a child, but he thought it was too late because of his unfaithfulness in studying with Watchtower; then Hindu; then Muslim religions, and he was sad, because after his wanderings he knew he wanted Jesus, after all, and he did not think he could retur to Him in simple faith, when in the midst of such thoughts [sitting in the library at his college, studying for finals] the LORD Jesus spoke forcefully to his inner man and said to him, in these words: "but I am faithful"; and the words were spoken in such a way to him that he knew he could come back and be received.
Right then and there, he broke down in that library and wept his heart out, and returned to Jesus.
He's been learning of His love ever since then, over fifteen years ago, and he's been my son-in-law for four years this year.
Hsa 14:2 Take with you words, and [re]turn to the LORD: say unto him, Take away all iniquity, and receive [us] graciously: so will we render the calves of our lips.
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.
