100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Christ without Christianity | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
MorningSong
on
Mon 11/07/11 12:09 AM
|
|
What are you sorry about.
 I don't think the word jealous means God is envious , either !!  In fact, It doesn't mean that AT ALL, simply because God does NOT have these kind of negative attributes !!! And IF one CLEARLY took the time to STUDY the Word, this would be made very clear !!! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
MorningSong
on
Mon 11/07/11 12:31 AM
|
|
Sorry Morning but the english word "jealous" fails to capture the meaning in this case. Although I will agree with you that those who study the bible are not confused and do not think that God experiences "envy". Regardless, God STILL gives ENOUGH UNDERSTANDING of HIS WORD to those Who Truly Seek to Know the Truth about God and His Word. But after a person becomes a BELIEVER, that Word NOW becomes his DAILY BREAD!! THEN the DEEPER meaning , which had remained hidden to the nonbeliever until his spiritual eyes were opened, is FULLY revealed now, as the believer CONTINUES daily in STUDYING God's Word ( which has now become his spiritual food in order to grow).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
MorningSong
on
Mon 11/07/11 01:06 AM
|
|
Question: "How does the translation process impact
the inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility of the Bible?" Answer: This question deals with three very important issues: inspiration, preservation, and translation. The doctrine of the inspiration of the Bible teaches that scripture is “God-breathed”; that is, God personally superintended the writing process, guiding the human authors so that His complete message was recorded for us. The Bible is truly God’s Word. During the writing process, the personality and writing style of each author was allowed expression; however, God so directed the writers that the 66 books they produced were free of error and were exactly what God wanted us to have. See 2 Timothy 3:16 and 2 Peter 1:21. Of course, when we speak of “inspiration,” we are referring only to the process by which the original documents were composed. After that, the doctrine of the preservation of the Bible takes over. If God went to such great lengths to give us His Word, surely He would also take steps to preserve that Word unchanged. What we see in history is that God did exactly that. The Old Testament Hebrew scriptures were painstakingly copied by Jewish scribes. Groups such as the Sopherim, the Zugoth, the Tannaim, and the Masoretes had a deep reverence for the texts they were copying. Their reverence was coupled with strict rules governing their work: the type of parchment used, the size of the columns, the kind of ink, and the spacing of words were all prescribed. Writing anything from memory was expressly forbidden, and the lines, words, and even the individual letters were methodically counted as a means of double-checking accuracy. The result of all this was that the words written by Isaiah’s pen are still available today. The discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls clearly confirms the precision of the Hebrew text. The same is true for the New Testament Greek text. Thousands of Greek texts, some dating back to nearly A.D. 117, are available. The slight variations among the texts—not one of which affects an article of faith—are easily reconciled. Scholars have concluded that the New Testament we have at present is virtually unchanged from the original writings. Textual scholar Sir Frederic Kenyon said about the Bible, “It is practically certain that the true reading of every doubtful passage is preserved. . . . This can be said of no other ancient book in the world.” This brings us to the translation of the Bible. Translation is an interpretative process, to some extent. When translating from one language to another, choices must be made. Should it be the more exact word, even if the meaning of that word is unclear to the modern reader? Or should it be a corresponding thought, at the expense of a more literal reading? As an example, in Colossians 3:12, Paul says we are to put on “bowels of mercies” (KJV). The Greek word for “bowels,” which is literally “intestines,” comes from a root word meaning “spleen.” The KJV translators chose a literal translation of the word. The translators of the NASB chose “heart of compassion”—the “heart” being what today’s reader thinks of as the seat of emotions. The Amplified Bible has it as “tenderhearted pity and mercy.” The NIV simply puts “compassion.” So, the KJV is the most literal in the above example, but the other translations certainly do justice to the verse. The core meaning of the command is to have compassionate feelings. Most translations of the Bible are done by committee. This helps to guarantee that no individual prejudice or theology will affect the decisions of word choice, etc. Of course, the committee itself may have a particular agenda or bias (such as those producing the current “gender-neutral” mistranslations). But there is still plenty of good scholarship being done, and many good translations are available. Having a good, honest translation of the Bible is important. A good translating team will have done its homework and will let the Bible speak for itself. As a general rule, the more literal translations, such as the KJV, NKJV, ASB and NASB, have less “interpretative” work. The “freer” translations, such as the NIV, NLT, and CEV, by necessity do more “interpretation” of the text, but are generally more readable. Then there are the paraphrases, such as The Message and The Living Bible, which are not really translations at all but one person’s retelling of the Bible. So, with all that in view, are translations of the Bible inspired and inerrant? The answer is no, they are not. God nowhere extends the promise of inspiration to translations of His Word. While many of the translations available today are superb in quality, they are not inspired by God, and are not perfect. Does this mean we cannot trust a translation? Again, the answer is no. Through careful study of Scripture, with the Holy Spirit's guidance, we can properly understand, interpret, and apply Scripture. Again, due to the faithful efforts of dedicated Christian translators (and of course the oversight of the Holy Spirit), the translations available today are superb and trustworthy. The fact that we cannot ascribe inerrancy to a translation should motivate us towards even closer study, and away from blind devotion towards any particular translation. gotquestions,org |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question: "Is the doctrine of preservation biblical?"
Answer: The doctrine of preservation in regard to Scripture means that the Lord has kept His Word intact as to its original meaning. Preservation simply means that we can trust the Scriptures because God has sovereignly overseen the process of transmission over the centuries. At the same time, we must also be aware that we do not possess the original writings/autographs. What we do have are thousands of manuscripts from which the original writings can be ascertained. By thorough examination and comparison of those manuscripts, it is determined what the original writings stated. This does not mean that there are absolutely no differences between the manuscripts. But the differences are extremely small and insignificant and do not in any way affect the basic teachings or meaning of God’s Word. The differences are things like minor spelling variations. We should keep in mind that this would not and does not affect the accuracy of Scripture, nor does it mean that God has not preserved His Word. God has supernaturally kept or preserved His Word. The early scribes, whose jobs were to make exact copies of Scripture, were very meticulous. One example of their scrupulous precision is the practice of counting all the letters in a given book and noting the middle letter of the book. They would then do the same for the copy to make sure it matched. They employed such time-consuming and painstaking methods to ensure accuracy. Further, we can take note of the following verses that demonstrate God’s plan to preserve His Word. In Matthew 5:18, Jesus said, “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.” In this verse Jesus declared that not even the smallest stroke of a letter in the Hebrew alphabet would pass away until all is accomplished. He couldn’t make that promise unless He was sure that God would preserve His Word. Jesus also said, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away” (Matthew 24:35; Mark 13:31; Luke 21:33). Jesus again affirms that God’s Word will not pass away. God’s Word will remain and accomplish that which God has planned. The prophet Isaiah, through the power of the Holy Spirit, stated that God’s Word would remain forever. “The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God stands forever” (Isaiah 40:8). This was reaffirmed in the New Testament when Peter quoted the same passage and referred to it as “the word that was preached to you” (1 Peter 1:24-25). Neither Isaiah nor Peter could make such statements without the understanding of God’s preservation of Scripture. We should keep in mind that when the Bible speaks of God’s Word remaining forever, it cannot be referring to it being kept hidden away in some vault in heaven. God’s Word was given specifically for mankind, and it would not be fulfilling its purpose if it were not available to us. “For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope” (Romans 15:4). Also note that a person cannot be saved apart from the gospel message, which is recorded in God’s Word (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). Therefore, in order for the gospel message to be proclaimed “to the ends of the earth” (Acts 13:47), the doctrines and truths of the Word must be protected. If Scripture were not supernaturally preserved, there would be no way to ensure the consistency of the message it contains. gotquestions.org |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
MorningSong
on
Mon 11/07/11 01:05 AM
|
|
Question: "Is the Bible truly God's Word?"
Answer: Our answer to this question will not only determine how we view the Bible and its importance to our lives, but also it will ultimately have an eternal impact on us. If the Bible is truly God’s Word, then we should cherish it, study it, obey it, and fully trust it. If the Bible is the Word of God, then to dismiss it is to dismiss God Himself. The fact that God gave us the Bible is an evidence and illustration of His love for us. The term “revelation” simply means that God communicated to mankind what He is like and how we can have a right relationship with Him. These are things that we could not have known had God not divinely revealed them to us in the Bible. Although God’s revelation of Himself in the Bible was given progressively over approximately 1500 years, it has always contained everything man needs to know about God in order to have a right relationship with Him. If the Bible is truly the Word of God, then it is the final authority for all matters of faith, religious practice, and morals. The question we must ask ourselves is how can we know that the Bible is the Word of God and not just a good book? What is unique about the Bible that sets it apart from all other religious books ever written? Is there any evidence that the Bible is truly God’s Word? These types of questions must be seriously examined if we are to determine the validity of the Bible’s claim to be the very Word of God, divinely inspired, and totally sufficient for all matters of faith and practice. There can be no doubt that the Bible does claim to be the very Word of God. This is clearly seen in Paul’s commendation to Timothy: “… from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:15-17). There are both internal and external evidences that the Bible is truly God’s Word. The internal evidences are those things within the Bible that testify of its divine origin. One of the first internal evidences that the Bible is truly God’s Word is seen in its unity. Even though it is really sixty-six individual books, written on three continents, in three different languages, over a period of approximately 1500 years, by more than 40 authors who came from many walks of life, the Bible remains one unified book from beginning to end without contradiction. This unity is unique from all other books and is evidence of the divine origin of the words which God moved men to record. Another of the internal evidences that indicates the Bible is truly God’s Word is the prophecies contained within its pages. The Bible contains hundreds of detailed prophecies relating to the future of individual nations including Israel, certain cities, and mankind. Other prophecies concern the coming of One who would be the Messiah, the Savior of all who would believe in Him. Unlike the prophecies found in other religious books or those by men such as Nostradamus, biblical prophecies are extremely detailed. There are over three hundred prophecies concerning Jesus Christ in the Old Testament. Not only was it foretold where He would be born and His lineage, but also how He would die and that He would rise again. There simply is no logical way to explain the fulfilled prophecies in the Bible other than by divine origin. There is no other religious book with the extent or type of predictive prophecy that the Bible contains. A third internal evidence of the divine origin of the Bible is its unique authority and power. While this evidence is more subjective than the first two, it is no less a powerful testimony of the divine origin of the Bible. The Bible’s authority is unlike any other book ever written. This authority and power are best seen in the way countless lives have been transformed by the supernatural power of God’s Word. Drug addicts have been cured by it, homosexuals set free by it, derelicts and deadbeats transformed by it, hardened criminals reformed by it, sinners rebuked by it, and hate turned to love by it. The Bible does possess a dynamic and transforming power that is only possible because it is truly God’s Word. There are also external evidences that indicate the Bible is truly the Word of God. One is the historicity of the Bible. Because the Bible details historical events, its truthfulness and accuracy are subject to verification like any other historical document. Through both archaeological evidences and other writings, the historical accounts of the Bible have been proven time and time again to be accurate and true. In fact, all the archaeological and manuscript evidence supporting the Bible makes it the best-documented book from the ancient world. The fact that the Bible accurately and truthfully records historically verifiable events is a great indication of its truthfulness when dealing with religious subjects and doctrines and helps substantiate its claim to be the very Word of God. Another external evidence that the Bible is truly God’s Word is the integrity of its human authors. As mentioned earlier, God used men from many walks of life to record His words. In studying the lives of these men, we find them to be honest and sincere. The fact that they were willing to die often excruciating deaths for what they believed testifies that these ordinary yet honest men truly believed God had spoken to them. The men who wrote the New Testament and many hundreds of other believers (1 Corinthians 15:6) knew the truth of their message because they had seen and spent time with Jesus Christ after He had risen from the dead. Seeing the risen Christ had a tremendous impact on them. They went from hiding in fear to being willing to die for the message God had revealed to them. Their lives and deaths testify to the fact that the Bible truly is God’s Word. A final external evidence that the Bible is truly God’s Word is the indestructibility of the Bible. Because of its importance and its claim to be the very Word of God, the Bible has suffered more vicious attacks and attempts to destroy it than any other book in history. From early Roman Emperors like Diocletian, through communist dictators and on to modern-day atheists and agnostics, the Bible has withstood and outlasted all of its attackers and is still today the most widely published book in the world. Throughout time, skeptics have regarded the Bible as mythological, but archeology has confirmed it as historical. Opponents have attacked its teaching as primitive and outdated, but its moral and legal concepts and teachings have had a positive influence on societies and cultures throughout the world. It continues to be attacked by pseudo-science, psychology, and political movements, yet it remains just as true and relevant today as it was when it was first written. It is a book that has transformed countless lives and cultures throughout the last 2000 years. No matter how its opponents try to attack, destroy, or discredit it, the Bible remains; its veracity and impact on lives is unmistakable. The accuracy which has been preserved despite every attempt to corrupt, attack, or destroy it is clear testimony to the fact that the Bible is truly God’s Word and is supernaturally protected by Him. It should not surprise us that, no matter how the Bible is attacked, it always comes out unchanged and unscathed. After all, Jesus said, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away” (Mark 13:31). After looking at the evidence, one can say without a doubt that, yes, the Bible is truly God’s Word. gotquestions.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is why it is obvious that "jealous" is a mistranslation. Then add that to ten thousand other mistranlsations. Looks like the whole Bible is pretty much a mistranslation. There certainly are a lot of difficulties in reading ancient texts and translating them into multiple languages. But it is really pretty easy to understand and is not that confusing for anyone who actually takes the time to try to understand it a little bit.  Anytime anyone gets into a debate about anything in the Bible or about an interpretation, I hear all about "mistranslations." It gotten to where that's all I hear. I am not confused in the least about the Bible. I read a word as I see it and for what it is supposed to mean. Jealousy means Jealousy. Period. It means that God does not want his followers to worship any other Gods, and as such proclaims that he is the only one that exists and commands people that thou shalt not have any other Gods before him. That's pretty clear to me. Not confused at all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is why it is obvious that "jealous" is a mistranslation. Then add that to ten thousand other mistranlsations. Looks like the whole Bible is pretty much a mistranslation. There certainly are a lot of difficulties in reading ancient texts and translating them into multiple languages. But it is really pretty easy to understand and is not that confusing for anyone who actually takes the time to try to understand it a little bit. I have never met anyone in my entire life who has convinced me that they understand the Bible. ~~~~~ I mean, sure, if you're going to over-simply to the point where you're just speaking to the basic story: 1. There exists a God. 2. Humans are misbehaving. 3. You are a human. 4. You have misbehaved. 5. You need to turn to God and ask for forgiveness. 6. If you do, you will be loved and given a great gift of everlasting life. 7. If you refuse, you will be punished for eternity. ~~~~~ A person would need to be brain dead to not understand that basic story. Even a Child can understand this, in fact they are basically given the very same story in Santa Claus. 1. There exists a Santa Claus. 2. Children often misbehave. 3. You are a child. 4. Don't misbehave. 5. If you are good Santa will bring you nice gifts. 6. If you are bad Santa will bring you a lump of coal. (actually at todays' prices that might not be too bad) ~~~~~ But seriously Slowhand, the crux of the story is extremely simple to understand, and I'm sure that everyone understands that basic ideal. But that doesn't even come remotely close to understanding the bible. That is an extreme over-simplification of this religion. ~~~~~ To truly claim to understand the Bible a person would need to fully understand how this supposed God could condemn people for merely not believing in him. Because, after all, this is part and parcel of this religion if we are going to hold these scriptures to what they actually say verbatim. John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. Do you claim to understand how a supposedly just and righteous God could condemn people for merely not believing in him? I certainly can't! This would be like telling a child that if they don't believe in Santa Claus he will be mean to them and hurt them. What kind of a Santa Claus would that be?  ~~~~~ When you say that the bible is easy to understand if a person merely tries a little bit, you are either totally ignorant of many of these kinds of issues, or you don't recognize their significance. Or perhaps you're just sweeping them under the carpet as being irrelevant in some way? But for many people there are tons of these kinds of issues in the Bible that are not at all "easy to understand" or accept. ~~~~~ Moreover, neither the Jews nor the Muslims accept that Jesus was the promised messiah. And they would say to you that this is easy to understand because the messiah that was promised by God in the name of King David was supposed to be handed the throne of King David and become the King of the Jews. Clearly that never happened for Jesus. Therefore it's extremely easy to understand why Jesus could not have been the promised messiah associated with King David. So you've got that whole issue to deal with right there. "easy to understand"? If that were the case then why is the Abrahamic religion so utterly divided and fragmented between the Christians who believe that Jesus was "The Christ", and the Jews and Muslims who don't see where that could be the case? This claim that the Biblical stories are "Easy to Understand" simply can't be supported in terms of actual cultures and their "understands" of this basic religion. ~~~~~ Even go over to the Christian side of things and look at how the Catholics and Protestants are divided in their "understandings" of the bible. The Catholics are quite adamant about there being a "Hell" for humans who do not satisfy the requirements of this God. However, many Protestants reject the notion of "Hell" for humans. Of course even the Protestants are in disagreement on that one among themselves. But a "hell-less" Christianity is more attractive and the "hell-less" Protestants are on the rise. ~~~~~ But seriously, when you say that the bible is "easy to understand" what exactly are you talking about? The basic Santa Claus idea? Yes, I think everything understand that idea. But that hardly constitutes "understanding" the Bible. ~~~~~ There are a LOT of issues associated with the Bible that I don't understand. Like I mentioned above, "A God who condemns people for merely not believing in him"? That makes no sense to me, and I cannot understand that in terms of a supposedly righteous God. Sounds more to me like a ploy invented by men to try to mentally coerce people into buying into their religion. (If you don't believe in our writings God will condemn you and we wash our hands of the whole affair). I simply don't buy it. Sounds like a man-made brainwashing scheme to me. Certainly not something I would expect from a truly righteous God. ~~~~~ And there are many other issues that I don't "understand" either. Blood sacrifices can "pay" for sins? And that just gets extremely complex when it comes to Jesus being the "sacrificial lamb of God" sent to pay for the sins of men. In fact, in my mind, that cannot even be made to be understandable in terms of a truly righteous and all-wise God. I just personally can't see anything either righteous, or all-wise about such a solution to problems. That's just not my idea of a wise solution to problems. Especially if this supposedly all-wise all-powerful God had other options available. And he would have had to lest he be less than all-powerful and all-wise. So I can't even imagine understanding how that could ever make any sense. ~~~~~ So no Slow, I cannot even imagine understanding the biblical story as an actual account of some supposedly all-wise all-righteous God. For me, it's far easier to understand that the whole thing is nothing more than superstitious man-made rumors. Now THAT, I can understand!  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is why it is obvious that "jealous" is a mistranslation. Then add that to ten thousand other mistranlsations. Looks like the whole Bible is pretty much a mistranslation. There certainly are a lot of difficulties in reading ancient texts and translating them into multiple languages. But it is really pretty easy to understand and is not that confusing for anyone who actually takes the time to try to understand it a little bit. Anytime anyone gets into a debate about anything in the Bible or about an interpretation, I hear all about "mistranslations." It gotten to where that's all I hear. I am not confused in the least about the Bible. I read a word as I see it and for what it is supposed to mean. Jealousy means Jealousy. Period. It means that God does not want his followers to worship any other Gods, and as such proclaims that he is the only one that exists and commands people that thou shalt not have any other Gods before him. That's pretty clear to me. Not confused at all. I agree. There's no question about it, you can tell from the context that it means precisely that. It's referring to a God who will not tolerate other gods being placed before him. That's precisely what Jealousy means. He won't stand for anyone being given more attention than him. I personally don't believe that this idea came from any God. I believe that this is just a man-made religion. They should have been more honest and wrote: "Thou shalt not have any other religions before ours because ours is a jealous religion and we won't tolerate other religions." That's what they really meant. I think I understand the bible very well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is why it is obvious that "jealous" is a mistranslation. Then add that to ten thousand other mistranlsations. Looks like the whole Bible is pretty much a mistranslation. There certainly are a lot of difficulties in reading ancient texts and translating them into multiple languages. But it is really pretty easy to understand and is not that confusing for anyone who actually takes the time to try to understand it a little bit. I have never met anyone in my entire life who has convinced me that they understand the Bible. ~~~~~ I mean, sure, if you're going to over-simply to the point where you're just speaking to the basic story: 1. There exists a God. 2. Humans are misbehaving. 3. You are a human. 4. You have misbehaved. 5. You need to turn to God and ask for forgiveness. 6. If you do, you will be loved and given a great gift of everlasting life. 7. If you refuse, you will be punished for eternity. ~~~~~ A person would need to be brain dead to not understand that basic story. Even a Child can understand this, in fact they are basically given the very same story in Santa Claus. 1. There exists a Santa Claus. 2. Children often misbehave. 3. You are a child. 4. Don't misbehave. 5. If you are good Santa will bring you nice gifts. 6. If you are bad Santa will bring you a lump of coal. (actually at todays' prices that might not be too bad) ~~~~~ But seriously Slowhand, the crux of the story is extremely simple to understand, and I'm sure that everyone understands that basic ideal. But that doesn't even come remotely close to understanding the bible. That is an extreme over-simplification of this religion. ~~~~~ To truly claim to understand the Bible a person would need to fully understand how this supposed God could condemn people for merely not believing in him. Because, after all, this is part and parcel of this religion if we are going to hold these scriptures to what they actually say verbatim. John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. Do you claim to understand how a supposedly just and righteous God could condemn people for merely not believing in him? I certainly can't! This would be like telling a child that if they don't believe in Santa Claus he will be mean to them and hurt them. What kind of a Santa Claus would that be? ~~~~~ When you say that the bible is easy to understand if a person merely tries a little bit, you are either totally ignorant of many of these kinds of issues, or you don't recognize their significance. Or perhaps you're just sweeping them under the carpet as being irrelevant in some way? But for many people there are tons of these kinds of issues in the Bible that are not at all "easy to understand" or accept. ~~~~~ Moreover, neither the Jews nor the Muslims accept that Jesus was the promised messiah. And they would say to you that this is easy to understand because the messiah that was promised by God in the name of King David was supposed to be handed the throne of King David and become the King of the Jews. Clearly that never happened for Jesus. Therefore it's extremely easy to understand why Jesus could not have been the promised messiah associated with King David. So you've got that whole issue to deal with right there. "easy to understand"? If that were the case then why is the Abrahamic religion so utterly divided and fragmented between the Christians who believe that Jesus was "The Christ", and the Jews and Muslims who don't see where that could be the case? This claim that the Biblical stories are "Easy to Understand" simply can't be supported in terms of actual cultures and their "understands" of this basic religion. ~~~~~ Even go over to the Christian side of things and look at how the Catholics and Protestants are divided in their "understandings" of the bible. The Catholics are quite adamant about there being a "Hell" for humans who do not satisfy the requirements of this God. However, many Protestants reject the notion of "Hell" for humans. Of course even the Protestants are in disagreement on that one among themselves. But a "hell-less" Christianity is more attractive and the "hell-less" Protestants are on the rise. ~~~~~ But seriously, when you say that the bible is "easy to understand" what exactly are you talking about? The basic Santa Claus idea? Yes, I think everything understand that idea. But that hardly constitutes "understanding" the Bible. ~~~~~ There are a LOT of issues associated with the Bible that I don't understand. Like I mentioned above, "A God who condemns people for merely not believing in him"? That makes no sense to me, and I cannot understand that in terms of a supposedly righteous God. Sounds more to me like a ploy invented by men to try to mentally coerce people into buying into their religion. (If you don't believe in our writings God will condemn you and we wash our hands of the whole affair). I simply don't buy it. Sounds like a man-made brainwashing scheme to me. Certainly not something I would expect from a truly righteous God. ~~~~~ And there are many other issues that I don't "understand" either. Blood sacrifices can "pay" for sins? And that just gets extremely complex when it comes to Jesus being the "sacrificial lamb of God" sent to pay for the sins of men. In fact, in my mind, that cannot even be made to be understandable in terms of a truly righteous and all-wise God. I just personally can't see anything either righteous, or all-wise about such a solution to problems. That's just not my idea of a wise solution to problems. Especially if this supposedly all-wise all-powerful God had other options available. And he would have had to lest he be less than all-powerful and all-wise. So I can't even imagine understanding how that could ever make any sense. ~~~~~ So no Slow, I cannot even imagine understanding the biblical story as an actual account of some supposedly all-wise all-righteous God. For me, it's far easier to understand that the whole thing is nothing more than superstitious man-made rumors. Now THAT, I can understand! 1. There exists a God. 2. Humans are misbehaving. 3. You are a human. 4. You have misbehaved. 5. You need to turn to God and ask for forgiveness. 6. If you do, you will be loved and given a great gift of everlasting life. 7. If you refuse, you will be punished for eternity. 1. There is a father, he is our God. 2. His creation has turned from him 3. You are a temple of God 4. You have made mistakes 5. You need to make amends for these mistakes 6. If you do, if you show that you are obedient, you will be rewarded with what was taken away because of disobedience. 7. If you refuse, you will die, as that is the punishment given to us for our disobedience. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cowboy wrote: 1. There is a father, he is our God. 2. His creation has turned from him 3. You are a temple of God 4. You have made mistakes 5. You need to make amends for these mistakes 6. If you do, if you show that you are obedient, you will be rewarded with what was taken away because of disobedience. 7. If you refuse, you will die, as that is the punishment given to us for our disobedience. There you go Slow! People aren't even in agreement with the BASIC story. Cowboy is one of those who rejects the concept of hell or eternal damnation. A lot of people (The Catholic Pope included) are quite adamant that the Bible clearly refers to a hell where people will be tortured endlessly. So even the Christians can't get this story straight between themselves. Much less being in agreement with the Jews or Muslims. So for a story that is supposed to be "Easy to Understand" why is it that everyone has such drastically different ideas of what the story is supposed to be about? These claims that the Bible is "Easy to Understand" simply doesn't hold water because everyone apparently has a different understanding of what it's supposedly saying. If anything is CRYSTAL CLEAR, it's that nobody understands these stories. Nobody. Everyone makes up their own little versions of it. And quite sadly too many of those people become quite arrogant about attempting to proclaim that their understanding is "correct" whilst everyone else is in the dark.  Today we now have a brand new religion that we should call "The Hell-less Christians". Those who totally reject the concept of Hell for human souls. Make-up your own version of the religion and proclaim that your version is the "gospel truth". That's where Christianity stands today. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Abra  Well I don't believe God condemns anybody. But that is just me. I don't even believe in heaven and hell as reward and punishment. I just don't see any substantive difference between Taoist, Pantheist, Abrahamic, Hindu or any other major religions on teachings on ethics and the nature of God in monotheism. I do believe that there are a wide variety of disparate and inconsistent interpretations of the religions by different people. But there is nothing evil or even misguided about the religions themselves. When I read the New Testament and it says you have to believe in Jesus - I interpret that to mean that yon need to follow his divine example - not just have this idea in your head that he really exists. Otherwise you'd have the ludicrous situation arise where someone is convinced that Jesus exists but still does unspeakable and heinous crimes - such a person should never be lauded or "saved" just because they also agree that Jesus existed. Now I think most Christians would say that you don't truly believe in Christ without following his example - so it is a moot point in their view and I'm fine with that. I also believe that you don't understand the bible. And I will go even further and agree with you that there is no such thing as a common understanding of the bible. It is a set of parables and ethical teachings and some of humankind's earliest grappling with philosophy and theology. Like the early writings on the Tao and Hinduism and Buddhism. None to be taken literally but to serve as a point of discussion on our origins and virtue. All of these works are inspired and valuable. But people should respect each others religious viewpoints and avoid coercion and disharmony. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cowboy wrote: 1. There is a father, he is our God. 2. His creation has turned from him 3. You are a temple of God 4. You have made mistakes 5. You need to make amends for these mistakes 6. If you do, if you show that you are obedient, you will be rewarded with what was taken away because of disobedience. 7. If you refuse, you will die, as that is the punishment given to us for our disobedience. There you go Slow! People aren't even in agreement with the BASIC story. Cowboy is one of those who rejects the concept of hell or eternal damnation. A lot of people (The Catholic Pope included) are quite adamant that the Bible clearly refers to a hell where people will be tortured endlessly. So even the Christians can't get this story straight between themselves. Much less being in agreement with the Jews or Muslims. So for a story that is supposed to be "Easy to Understand" why is it that everyone has such drastically different ideas of what the story is supposed to be about? These claims that the Bible is "Easy to Understand" simply doesn't hold water because everyone apparently has a different understanding of what it's supposedly saying. If anything is CRYSTAL CLEAR, it's that nobody understands these stories. Nobody. Everyone makes up their own little versions of it. And quite sadly too many of those people become quite arrogant about attempting to proclaim that their understanding is "correct" whilst everyone else is in the dark. Today we now have a brand new religion that we should call "The Hell-less Christians". Those who totally reject the concept of Hell for human souls. Make-up your own version of the religion and proclaim that your version is the "gospel truth". That's where Christianity stands today. Cowboy is one of those who rejects the concept of hell or eternal damnation. I do no such thing. Hell is a definite place. It is a holding place for Satan and his minions. Never disagreed with this, nor have I ever ever said it did not exist. Never rejected eternal damnation either. Only eternal torture. From the original languages in which the Bible was written, one Hebrew word and three Greek words are translated "hell" in our English-language Bibles. The four words convey three different meanings. The Hebrew word sheol, used in the Old Testament, has the same meaning as hades, one of the three Greek words translated "hell" in the New Testament The Anchor Bible Dictionary explains the meaning of both words: "The Greek word Hades...is sometimes, but misleadingly, translated 'hell' in English versions of the N[ew] T[estament]. It refers to the place of the dead...The old Hebrew concept of the place of the dead, most often called Sheol...is usually translated as Hades, and the Greek term was naturally and commonly used by Jews writing in Greek" Both sheol and hades refer simply to the grave. A comparison of an Old Testament and a New Testament scripture confirm this. Psalm:16:10 says, "For You will not leave my soul in Sheol, nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption." In Acts:2:27, the apostle Peter quotes this verse and shows that it is a reference to Jesus Christ. Here the Greek word hades is substituted for the Hebrew sheol. Many scriptures that use the term hell in the King James Version are simply talking about the grave, the place where everyone, whether good or evil, goes at death. The Hebrew word sheol is used in the Old Testament 65 times. In the King James Version it is translated "grave" 31 times, "hell" 31 times and "pit"—a hole in the ground—three times |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cowboy wrote: 1. There is a father, he is our God. 2. His creation has turned from him 3. You are a temple of God 4. You have made mistakes 5. You need to make amends for these mistakes 6. If you do, if you show that you are obedient, you will be rewarded with what was taken away because of disobedience. 7. If you refuse, you will die, as that is the punishment given to us for our disobedience. There you go Slow! People aren't even in agreement with the BASIC story. Cowboy is one of those who rejects the concept of hell or eternal damnation. A lot of people (The Catholic Pope included) are quite adamant that the Bible clearly refers to a hell where people will be tortured endlessly. So even the Christians can't get this story straight between themselves. Much less being in agreement with the Jews or Muslims. So for a story that is supposed to be "Easy to Understand" why is it that everyone has such drastically different ideas of what the story is supposed to be about? These claims that the Bible is "Easy to Understand" simply doesn't hold water because everyone apparently has a different understanding of what it's supposedly saying. If anything is CRYSTAL CLEAR, it's that nobody understands these stories. Nobody. Everyone makes up their own little versions of it. And quite sadly too many of those people become quite arrogant about attempting to proclaim that their understanding is "correct" whilst everyone else is in the dark. Today we now have a brand new religion that we should call "The Hell-less Christians". Those who totally reject the concept of Hell for human souls. Make-up your own version of the religion and proclaim that your version is the "gospel truth". That's where Christianity stands today. Cowboy is one of those who rejects the concept of hell or eternal damnation. I do no such thing. Hell is a definite place. It is a holding place for Satan and his minions. Never disagreed with this, nor have I ever ever said it did not exist. Never rejected eternal damnation either. Only eternal torture. From the original languages in which the Bible was written, one Hebrew word and three Greek words are translated "hell" in our English-language Bibles. The four words convey three different meanings. The Hebrew word sheol, used in the Old Testament, has the same meaning as hades, one of the three Greek words translated "hell" in the New Testament The Anchor Bible Dictionary explains the meaning of both words: "The Greek word Hades...is sometimes, but misleadingly, translated 'hell' in English versions of the N[ew] T[estament]. It refers to the place of the dead...The old Hebrew concept of the place of the dead, most often called Sheol...is usually translated as Hades, and the Greek term was naturally and commonly used by Jews writing in Greek" Both sheol and hades refer simply to the grave. A comparison of an Old Testament and a New Testament scripture confirm this. Psalm:16:10 says, "For You will not leave my soul in Sheol, nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption." In Acts:2:27, the apostle Peter quotes this verse and shows that it is a reference to Jesus Christ. Here the Greek word hades is substituted for the Hebrew sheol. Many scriptures that use the term hell in the King James Version are simply talking about the grave, the place where everyone, whether good or evil, goes at death. The Hebrew word sheol is used in the Old Testament 65 times. In the King James Version it is translated "grave" 31 times, "hell" 31 times and "pit"—a hole in the ground—three times A second Greek word, tartaroo, is also translated "hell" in the New Testament. This word is used only once in the Bible (2 Peter:2:4), where it refers to the current restraint or imprisonment of the fallen angels, otherwise known as demons The place where they are imprisoned is not some dark or fiery netherworld. Rather, their confinement is on the earth, where they wield influence over the nations and over individuals. The Gospels record that Jesus Christ and His apostles had very real encounters with Satan and His demons (Matthew:4:1-11; 8:16, 28-33; 9:32-33; John:13:26-27). Jesus even referred to Satan as the ruler of this world (John:12:31; 14:30; 16:11) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cowboy wrote: 1. There is a father, he is our God. 2. His creation has turned from him 3. You are a temple of God 4. You have made mistakes 5. You need to make amends for these mistakes 6. If you do, if you show that you are obedient, you will be rewarded with what was taken away because of disobedience. 7. If you refuse, you will die, as that is the punishment given to us for our disobedience. There you go Slow! People aren't even in agreement with the BASIC story. Cowboy is one of those who rejects the concept of hell or eternal damnation. A lot of people (The Catholic Pope included) are quite adamant that the Bible clearly refers to a hell where people will be tortured endlessly. So even the Christians can't get this story straight between themselves. Much less being in agreement with the Jews or Muslims. So for a story that is supposed to be "Easy to Understand" why is it that everyone has such drastically different ideas of what the story is supposed to be about? These claims that the Bible is "Easy to Understand" simply doesn't hold water because everyone apparently has a different understanding of what it's supposedly saying. If anything is CRYSTAL CLEAR, it's that nobody understands these stories. Nobody. Everyone makes up their own little versions of it. And quite sadly too many of those people become quite arrogant about attempting to proclaim that their understanding is "correct" whilst everyone else is in the dark. Today we now have a brand new religion that we should call "The Hell-less Christians". Those who totally reject the concept of Hell for human souls. Make-up your own version of the religion and proclaim that your version is the "gospel truth". That's where Christianity stands today. Cowboy is one of those who rejects the concept of hell or eternal damnation. I do no such thing. Hell is a definite place. It is a holding place for Satan and his minions. Never disagreed with this, nor have I ever ever said it did not exist. Never rejected eternal damnation either. Only eternal torture. From the original languages in which the Bible was written, one Hebrew word and three Greek words are translated "hell" in our English-language Bibles. The four words convey three different meanings. The Hebrew word sheol, used in the Old Testament, has the same meaning as hades, one of the three Greek words translated "hell" in the New Testament The Anchor Bible Dictionary explains the meaning of both words: "The Greek word Hades...is sometimes, but misleadingly, translated 'hell' in English versions of the N[ew] T[estament]. It refers to the place of the dead...The old Hebrew concept of the place of the dead, most often called Sheol...is usually translated as Hades, and the Greek term was naturally and commonly used by Jews writing in Greek" Both sheol and hades refer simply to the grave. A comparison of an Old Testament and a New Testament scripture confirm this. Psalm:16:10 says, "For You will not leave my soul in Sheol, nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption." In Acts:2:27, the apostle Peter quotes this verse and shows that it is a reference to Jesus Christ. Here the Greek word hades is substituted for the Hebrew sheol. Many scriptures that use the term hell in the King James Version are simply talking about the grave, the place where everyone, whether good or evil, goes at death. The Hebrew word sheol is used in the Old Testament 65 times. In the King James Version it is translated "grave" 31 times, "hell" 31 times and "pit"—a hole in the ground—three times A second Greek word, tartaroo, is also translated "hell" in the New Testament. This word is used only once in the Bible (2 Peter:2:4), where it refers to the current restraint or imprisonment of the fallen angels, otherwise known as demons The place where they are imprisoned is not some dark or fiery netherworld. Rather, their confinement is on the earth, where they wield influence over the nations and over individuals. The Gospels record that Jesus Christ and His apostles had very real encounters with Satan and His demons (Matthew:4:1-11; 8:16, 28-33; 9:32-33; John:13:26-27). Jesus even referred to Satan as the ruler of this world (John:12:31; 14:30; 16:11) And last but not least, to refute the idea of torture in hell for those that do not receive the gift of Heaven. Another place where Jesus speaks of gehenna fire is Matthew:10:28: "And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell [gehenna]." We should notice that Jesus does not speak of people suffering everlasting torment. He says that God can destroy—annihilate—both the body and soul in Gehenna fire. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slowhand wrote: Hi Abra Well I don't believe God condemns anybody. But that is just me. I don't even believe in heaven and hell as reward and punishment. I just don't see any substantive difference between Taoist, Pantheist, Abrahamic, Hindu or any other major religions on teachings on ethics and the nature of God in monotheism. I do believe that there are a wide variety of disparate and inconsistent interpretations of the religions by different people. But there is nothing evil or even misguided about the religions themselves. When I read the New Testament and it says you have to believe in Jesus - I interpret that to mean that yon need to follow his divine example - not just have this idea in your head that he really exists. Otherwise you'd have the ludicrous situation arise where someone is convinced that Jesus exists but still does unspeakable and heinous crimes - such a person should never be lauded or "saved" just because they also agree that Jesus existed. Now I think most Christians would say that you don't truly believe in Christ without following his example - so it is a moot point in their view and I'm fine with that. I also believe that you don't understand the bible. And I will go even further and agree with you that there is no such thing as a common understanding of the bible. It is a set of parables and ethical teachings and some of humankind's earliest grappling with philosophy and theology. Like the early writings on the Tao and Hinduism and Buddhism. None to be taken literally but to serve as a point of discussion on our origins and virtue. All of these works are inspired and valuable. But people should respect each others religious viewpoints and avoid coercion and disharmony. In terms of mere moral values, and in terms of a totally abstract concept of "god" in general I would tend to agree with you. Sure, I too can view the Bible in that way. And in fact, I do to some extent. But you know as well as I do that that view is NOT the view of "Christianity" in general. They would totally reject our views. They demand that Jesus is the only way to God. Jesus is the Lord and Savior of the world. He died to pay for your sins. There is no other way to get to God but through the acceptance of Jesus as your "Savior". Etc., etc., etc. The way that you are viewing the Bible is as "Just another spiritual view of God", not really all that much different from Taoism, Buddhism, etc. And that Jesus is merely a metaphorical example of the kind of moral values we should strive to be like. In that metaphorical sense I'm about as "Christian" as a person can possibly be because I am extremely "Christ-like". I even call the Pharisees hypocrites. If to be "Christ-like" was the only requirement then I'd be a shining example of what "Christians" should all strive to be like. I have no problem with any of the moral values that are associated with the teachings of Jesus. On the contrary, he basically described my own personal moral values. I've said it many times before, it would be pretty darn hard to "follow" the teachings of someone who just got done teaching precisely the character traits and moral values that I already hold. How can you "follow" someone who is asking you to do precisely what you are already doing? The things I argue with concerning the RELIGION of Christianity typically don't have anything at all to do with the moral teachings of Jesus. And I also agree with you that to follow the teachings of Taoism, Confucius, Lao Tzu, Buddha, etc, would be precisely the same thing as following the teachings of Jesus. They all taught basically the very same things in terms of moral values. In fact, that's a point that I make quite often. Jesus didn't teach anything new or unique. He taught the very same things that had been taught for centuries before he ever existed. This is why I'm convinced that Jesus was indeed a Mahayana Buddhist who was trying to teach his Hebrew brothers better moral values than they had been taught by the teachings of the Torah. ~~~~ However, even when it comes down to that, I'm only in agreement with you in terms of the moral standards that Jesus taught. I would still argue that the teachings of the Torah or Old Testament are far more closely aligned with the teachings of Greek Mythologies. So concerning the Old Testament, I would say that it has about the same spiritual value as Greek Mythology. And you can take that however you like. I don't totally dismiss the value of Greek Mythology myself. There are moral and spiritual values in many fictitious stories. All I'm saying is that I don't see where the Hebrew Torah had anything better to offer than Greek Mythology. They were both most likely superstitious rumors made up by men. Maybe some of those stories were associated with divine inspiration and interventions - in BOTH CASES: Greek mythology and Hebrew mythology. I don't don't totally dismiss that. But I'm certainly not going to take either mythology to be the inerrant infallible verbatim commandments and directives of any "real" God. If there is any spiritual truth to any of those stories it's no doubt that they were also contaminated with the views and opinions of the mortal authors who wrote them, retold them, transcribed them, and so on. So I see no reason to take anything too seriously in terms of details. I'll never believe in, or support a male-chauvinistic God, for example. I also have extreme problems with any God who would condemn same-gender love. I can't imagine a God who would be so physically prejudiced against LOVE. As metaphors that aren't taken too seriously. Sure, let the Bible be 'spiritual' in that way. But as a verbatim manual of precisely what some male-chauvinistic God is demanding that we be like lest we be severely punished. I don't think so. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Mon 11/07/11 12:37 PM
|
|
Question: "Is the Bible truly God's Word?" Answer: Our answer to this question will not only determine how we view the Bible and its importance to our lives, but also it will ultimately have an eternal impact on us. If the Bible is truly God’s Word, then we should cherish it, study it, obey it, and fully trust it. If the Bible is the Word of God, then to dismiss it is to dismiss God Himself. The Bible is not God's word in my opinion. I do not dismiss God but the Bible has too many inconsistencies and mistranslations to be taken as Gods word. Just because it claims to be "Gods word,' that does not make it true. Prophecies: Just because there are prophecies in the old testament that "appear" to have been fulfilled in a later written "new" testament, that is not evidence that there is anything magical or divine about the Bible because these prophecies were well known myths even before the New Testament was ever written, so they could easily have been borrowed and used in creating the fiction of the new testament. People 2000 years ago may have easily believed anything that was written down and taken it as fact. People were like children and they believed that if it was written, that somehow meant it must be true. Not many people could read or write back then so anything written was regarded at almost magic. The evidence for supporting that the Bible is Gods word is very weak and only works for people who already choose to believe it. If a cheesy magic act could time travel back 2000 years ago he could easily fool everyone into thinking he was a God, or that he could heal people and perform magic. People today are much more evolved than that, they would not fall for that line in this day. Yet they still cling to 2000 year old stories and believe they are written by God. There are many spiritually enlightening books today that far outshine the ancient child's stories and myths of the Bible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cowboy wrote: And last but not least, to refute the idea of torture in hell for those that do not receive the gift of Heaven. Take it up with the Pope Cowboy, and with other fundamental Christians who vehemently support the concept of hell for human souls. I really don't care about your views on hell. My point is that no two people can agree on these kinds of things. Therefore to say that the Bible is "easy to understand" or "crystal clear" has no merit. All you're doing is arguing for YOUR PERSONAL VIEWS on what you think about hell. Who cares? I sure as hell don't. According to Matthew Jesus said that they will be case into a furnace of fire and there will be wailing and the gnashing of teeth. So the Bible is threatening severe discomfort and torment. Will it last for all of eternity? Well, the Gospels also have Jesus stating that this will be 'everlasting punishment'. He also said that the fire will be unquenchable. So I can certainly see how the Catholic Church and many others would easily conclude that this burning state of wailing and gnashing of teeth in an unquenchable fire would be "everlasting punishment". You'll have to explain your objections to the Pope is all I know to tell you. Personally I'm not impressed by a God who would even stoop so low as to be so cruel to people even for a brief period of time. And for what? For merely not believing that Jesus was the son of God? No way do I accept that notion as being "righteous". So your point about hell is totally moot. It doesn't matter whether it's eternal, or merely for a finite time, it's still disgusting, IMHO. I don't believe that any all-righteous God would be involved in such horrible behavior. What GOOD would it do God to be torturing people anyway? Would God get a THRILL out of that or what? What would be the PURPOSE of torturing people that God doesn't even want around? ~~~~~~ Remember, we're talking about trying to understand these biblical stories, scenarios, and claims about how God will act toward people. Well, I cannot possibly understand what GOOD it would do to torture anyone even if only briefly. What would be the point to it? That would just be downright nasty. Surely an all-powerful God who can do anything could just wave his magic wand and make the people disappear that he isn't interested in. No need to be casting them into furnaces and gnashing their teeth. What would be the POINT to that? That's what I don't understand. So you understand what GOOD there is in being mean and cruel to people that you are just going to kill anyway? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question: "Is the Bible truly God's Word?" Answer: Our answer to this question will not only determine how we view the Bible and its importance to our lives, but also it will ultimately have an eternal impact on us. If the Bible is truly God’s Word, then we should cherish it, study it, obey it, and fully trust it. If the Bible is the Word of God, then to dismiss it is to dismiss God Himself. The Bible is not God's word in my opinion. I do not dismiss God but the Bible has too many inconsistencies and mistranslations to be taken as Gods word. Just because it claims to be "Gods word,' that does not make it true. Prophecies: Just because there are prophecies in the old testament that "appear" to have been fulfilled in a later written "new" testament, that is not not evidence that there is anything magical or divine about the Bible because these prophecies were well known myths even before the New Testament was ever written, so they could easily have been borrowed and used in creating the fiction of the new testament. People 2000 years ago may have easily believed anything that was written down and taken it as fact. People were like children and they believed that if it was written, that somehow meant it must be true. Not many people could read or write back then so anything written was regarded at almost magic. The evidence for supporting that the Bible is Gods word is very weak and only works for people who already choose to believe it. If a cheesy magic act could time travel back 2000 years ago he could easily fool everyone into thinking he was a God, or that he could heal people and perform magic. People today are much more evolved than than, they would not fall for that line in this day. Yet they still cling to 2000 year old stories and believe they are written by God. There are many spiritually enlightening books today that far outshine the ancient child's stories and myths of the Bible. I'm in total agreement with every word you wrote here. Very well said. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cowboy wrote: And last but not least, to refute the idea of torture in hell for those that do not receive the gift of Heaven. Take it up with the Pope Cowboy, and with other fundamental Christians who vehemently support the concept of hell for human souls. I really don't care about your views on hell. My point is that no two people can agree on these kinds of things. Therefore to say that the Bible is "easy to understand" or "crystal clear" has no merit. All you're doing is arguing for YOUR PERSONAL VIEWS on what you think about hell. Who cares? I sure as hell don't. According to Matthew Jesus said that they will be case into a furnace of fire and there will be wailing and the gnashing of teeth. So the Bible is threatening severe discomfort and torment. Will it last for all of eternity? Well, the Gospels also have Jesus stating that this will be 'everlasting punishment'. He also said that the fire will be unquenchable. So I can certainly see how the Catholic Church and many others would easily conclude that this burning state of wailing and gnashing of teeth in an unquenchable fire would be "everlasting punishment". You'll have to explain your objections to the Pope is all I know to tell you. Personally I'm not impressed by a God who would even stoop so low as to be so cruel to people even for a brief period of time. And for what? For merely not believing that Jesus was the son of God? No way do I accept that notion as being "righteous". So your point about hell is totally moot. It doesn't matter whether it's eternal, or merely for a finite time, it's still disgusting, IMHO. I don't believe that any all-righteous God would be involved in such horrible behavior. What GOOD would it do God to be torturing people anyway? Would God get a THRILL out of that or what? What would be the PURPOSE of torturing people that God doesn't even want around? ~~~~~~ Remember, we're talking about trying to understand these biblical stories, scenarios, and claims about how God will act toward people. Well, I cannot possibly understand what GOOD it would do to torture anyone even if only briefly. What would be the point to it? That would just be downright nasty. Surely an all-powerful God who can do anything could just wave his magic wand and make the people disappear that he isn't interested in. No need to be casting them into furnaces and gnashing their teeth. What would be the POINT to that? That's what I don't understand. So you understand what GOOD there is in being mean and cruel to people that you are just going to kill anyway? All you're doing is arguing for YOUR PERSONAL VIEWS on what you think about hell. Who cares? I sure as hell don't. Sure you do, or you wouldn't be here. Or are you just here to spread your hatred towards other religions? Especially the Christian faith? According to Matthew Jesus said that they will be case into a furnace of fire and there will be wailing and the gnashing of teeth. So the Bible is threatening severe discomfort and torment. Will it last for all of eternity? Well, the Gospels also have Jesus stating that this will be 'everlasting punishment'. He also said that the fire will be unquenchable. No threats, merely informing us of such knowledge. If God would have told us not to play with fire, or you might get burned... Would it be a threat? By your logic, it would be. Personally I'm not impressed by a God who would even stoop so low as to be so cruel to people even for a brief period of time. And for what? For merely not believing that Jesus was the son of God? No one will be punished for merely not believing in Jesus. The only reward for sin is death. Jesus is the only way to receive forgiveness of the sins. So it would be the sins you would be punished for, not specifically the disbelief in Jesus. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Choosing love (good/god) over hate(bad/evil) is the way to be saved.
|
|
|
|
|
