How To Get To Heaven When You Die. Read The First Post. Then Q&A Discussion. Ask Questions Here! (7 Viewers)

[Joe Bryant]

The Bible is completely silent on the age of the earth. The 6000 year thing is an interpretation of words going beyond what the words require. An extrapolation if you will. That is not an application of science.

I would partially agree with you that the Bible doesn't tell us the exact age of the earth and that one must extrapolate the age through the historical writings and the events that took place around the events in the writings, but I also believe that the creation of Adam and Eve can be fairly extrapolated through the Scriptures. Some disagree on the age of the earth because of the events that took place before the creation of Adam and Eve. The Gap Theory allows for the earth to be as old as the Evolutionists say it is, but it doesn't necessarily have to be that old. Some also believe in a pre Adamic flood that came before Adam and Eve were created, Hence the passage "And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters..." Personally, I don't tend to agree with those theories, but I acknowledge that I could be wrong. Biblically, there is a case that can be made.

the age of the earth has nothing to do with evolution. The facts of evolution just correlate with the age of the earth based on other lines of evidence.

While we're hitting all the big topics I also don't know many Christians who put much effort into evolution. Yes, years ago maybe. And I know they for sure exist today. But denying that things evolve is like denying gravity.

Now I know there are some that like to debate a literal 7 day creation with 24 hour days as we know it origin. And that the first humans ever looked exactly like humans today. I personally don't think arguing those points are a productive use of my time. I'd much rather focus on trying to follow Jesus and his teachings.

That gets into again big discussions and tangent parsing out arguments that almost never go anywhere. I am completely comfortable with the idea God created the world and it changes over time. As are most Christians I know.

I think you are in the minority her, Joe, at least among those claiming to be Christian

Hi @Navin Johnson I could well be in the minority. Not sure. I just know in my own life, I never seem to have much reason to think about the details or whether it was a literal 7 day creation or not and that kind of thing. And I have tons of reasons to and situations that come up where Jesus' teachings are right in the middle of it. From loving a neighbor to who is your neighbor to following Jesus and much more. And I've seen it in the past where those things (that seem both super important and relevant) can get pushed aside as people go deep into the weeds of what kind of dinosaurs were in the Garden of Eden. So for me, it's a priority thing.

But I also understand it's important too. And don't want to diminish that as I know folks like @dgreen see it differently.

Like anything I post here, this is just how I see it.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

The Bible is completely silent on the age of the earth. The 6000 year thing is an interpretation of words going beyond what the words require. An extrapolation if you will. That is not an application of science.

I would partially agree with you that the Bible doesn't tell us the exact age of the earth and that one must extrapolate the age through the historical writings and the events that took place around the events in the writings, but I also believe that the creation of Adam and Eve can be fairly extrapolated through the Scriptures. Some disagree on the age of the earth because of the events that took place before the creation of Adam and Eve. The Gap Theory allows for the earth to be as old as the Evolutionists say it is, but it doesn't necessarily have to be that old. Some also believe in a pre Adamic flood that came before Adam and Eve were created, Hence the passage "And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters..." Personally, I don't tend to agree with those theories, but I acknowledge that I could be wrong. Biblically, there is a case that can be made.

the age of the earth has nothing to do with evolution. The facts of evolution just correlate with the age of the earth based on other lines of evidence.

While we're hitting all the big topics I also don't know many Christians who put much effort into evolution. Yes, years ago maybe. And I know they for sure exist today. But denying that things evolve is like denying gravity.

Now I know there are some that like to debate a literal 7 day creation with 24 hour days as we know it origin. And that the first humans ever looked exactly like humans today. I personally don't think arguing those points are a productive use of my time. I'd much rather focus on trying to follow Jesus and his teachings.

That gets into again big discussions and tangent parsing out arguments that almost never go anywhere. I am completely comfortable with the idea God created the world and it changes over time. As are most Christians I know.

This isn't the argument (at least as I've ever heard it). I don't think I've ever seen this argument. People have made it?

 

[Sparky Polastri]

The Rich man and Lazarus was not a Parable. It uses proper names, Abraham is a real person. Not a Parable.

Ok, now what? Is this just a discussion for the fun of it (which, of course, is perfectly fine) or do you think it’s important that people see it is as a real story? I’m not sure where you are coming from on this, so I’m not sure where to go next.

I believe that the story of the Rich man and Lazarus is a true event that occurred because Parables don't use proper names. In the story of the Rich man and Lazarus, Abraham is mentioned who we know is a real life person who existed. Lazarus is a proper name of a man, which also doesn't happen in Parables. The detail of the story could only be interpreted as a real event, not a Parable or Allegory.

Ok. I’m still not sure why you think it’s an important distinction. What’s the problem with someone reading it as a parable?

It's an important distinction because I believe that there is a false teaching that there is no hell. And those who don't believe in hell call this passage an allegory or a parable in order to dismiss its reality. There are other passages that allude to hell also, but this passage is the most detailed account of it.

Hell is wherever God isn't from a "location" perspective. Do you think it's a "place" or something? Either way, I don't see why that specific story being factual vs parable would impact that discussion in any way.

 

[dgreen]

The Bible is completely silent on the age of the earth. The 6000 year thing is an interpretation of words going beyond what the words require. An extrapolation if you will. That is not an application of science.

I would partially agree with you that the Bible doesn't tell us the exact age of the earth and that one must extrapolate the age through the historical writings and the events that took place around the events in the writings, but I also believe that the creation of Adam and Eve can be fairly extrapolated through the Scriptures. Some disagree on the age of the earth because of the events that took place before the creation of Adam and Eve. The Gap Theory allows for the earth to be as old as the Evolutionists say it is, but it doesn't necessarily have to be that old. Some also believe in a pre Adamic flood that came before Adam and Eve were created, Hence the passage "And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters..." Personally, I don't tend to agree with those theories, but I acknowledge that I could be wrong. Biblically, there is a case that can be made.

the age of the earth has nothing to do with evolution. The facts of evolution just correlate with the age of the earth based on other lines of evidence.

While we're hitting all the big topics I also don't know many Christians who put much effort into evolution. Yes, years ago maybe. And I know they for sure exist today. But denying that things evolve is like denying gravity.

Now I know there are some that like to debate a literal 7 day creation with 24 hour days as we know it origin. And that the first humans ever looked exactly like humans today. I personally don't think arguing those points are a productive use of my time. I'd much rather focus on trying to follow Jesus and his teachings.

That gets into again big discussions and tangent parsing out arguments that almost never go anywhere. I am completely comfortable with the idea God created the world and it changes over time. As are most Christians I know.

I think you are in the minority her, Joe, at least among those claiming to be Christian

Hi @Navin Johnson I could well be in the minority. Not sure. I just know in my own life, I never seem to have much reason to think about the details or whether it was a literal 7 day creation or not and that kind of thing. And I have tons of reasons to and situations that come up where Jesus' teachings are right in the middle of it. From loving a neighbor to who is your neighbor to following Jesus and much more. And I've seen it in the past where those things (that seem both super important and relevant) can get pushed aside as people go deep into the weeds of what kind of dinosaurs were in the Garden of Eden. So for me, it's a priority thing.

But I also understand it's important too. And don't want to diminish that as I know folks like @dgreen see it differently.

Like anything I post here, this is just how I see it.

When you say "it's a priority thing", what are you comparing? Are you comparing Jesus' teaching with a topic like dinosaurs in Eden? Or Jesus' teaching with a text like Genesis? Or both? I understand the priority thing. There are huge parts of the Bible that I spend little-to-no time. Just curious how you handle Genesis, or really anything outside of Jesus' teachings.

While I see discussing dinosaurs in Eden to be a low-priority topic, I think it's usually done with an effort to understand Genesis which I see as a high-priority thing so I'm willing to engage. Maybe that was already clear in what I said earlier, but just wanted to clarify what I find important (or maybe I should say "interesting").

 

[Joe Bryant]

The Bible is completely silent on the age of the earth. The 6000 year thing is an interpretation of words going beyond what the words require. An extrapolation if you will. That is not an application of science.

I would partially agree with you that the Bible doesn't tell us the exact age of the earth and that one must extrapolate the age through the historical writings and the events that took place around the events in the writings, but I also believe that the creation of Adam and Eve can be fairly extrapolated through the Scriptures. Some disagree on the age of the earth because of the events that took place before the creation of Adam and Eve. The Gap Theory allows for the earth to be as old as the Evolutionists say it is, but it doesn't necessarily have to be that old. Some also believe in a pre Adamic flood that came before Adam and Eve were created, Hence the passage "And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters..." Personally, I don't tend to agree with those theories, but I acknowledge that I could be wrong. Biblically, there is a case that can be made.

the age of the earth has nothing to do with evolution. The facts of evolution just correlate with the age of the earth based on other lines of evidence.

While we're hitting all the big topics I also don't know many Christians who put much effort into evolution. Yes, years ago maybe. And I know they for sure exist today. But denying that things evolve is like denying gravity.

Now I know there are some that like to debate a literal 7 day creation with 24 hour days as we know it origin. And that the first humans ever looked exactly like humans today. I personally don't think arguing those points are a productive use of my time. I'd much rather focus on trying to follow Jesus and his teachings.

That gets into again big discussions and tangent parsing out arguments that almost never go anywhere. I am completely comfortable with the idea God created the world and it changes over time. As are most Christians I know.

I think you are in the minority her, Joe, at least among those claiming to be Christian

Hi @Navin Johnson I could well be in the minority. Not sure. I just know in my own life, I never seem to have much reason to think about the details or whether it was a literal 7 day creation or not and that kind of thing. And I have tons of reasons to and situations that come up where Jesus' teachings are right in the middle of it. From loving a neighbor to who is your neighbor to following Jesus and much more. And I've seen it in the past where those things (that seem both super important and relevant) can get pushed aside as people go deep into the weeds of what kind of dinosaurs were in the Garden of Eden. So for me, it's a priority thing.

But I also understand it's important too. And don't want to diminish that as I know folks like @dgreen see it differently.

Like anything I post here, this is just how I see it.

When you say "it's a priority thing", what are you comparing? Are you comparing Jesus' teaching with a topic like dinosaurs in Eden? Or Jesus' teaching with a text like Genesis? Or both? I understand the priority thing. There are huge parts of the Bible that I spend little-to-no time. Just curious how you handle Genesis, or really anything outside of Jesus' teachings.

While I see discussing dinosaurs in Eden to be a low-priority topic, I think it's usually done with an effort to understand Genesis which I see as a high-priority thing so I'm willing to engage. Maybe that was already clear in what I said earlier, but just wanted to clarify what I find important (or maybe I should say "interesting").

For me a priority thing is things that can impact my life and my relationships in how I follow Jesus. I'm not saying the Garden of Eden isn't important. But I see it my real life where I have friends who it seems like would rather spend time in a deep scholarly dive over what kind of animals were there instead of more practical "hands and feet of Jesus" stuff. Stuff that to me is much more in the "reflecting Jesus" area of things.

And again, I don't mean to diminish. I know there is value in all of it. I've just seen it squeeze out other things that to me felt like something with higher priority.

 

[Paddington]

The Rich man and Lazarus was not a Parable. It uses proper names, Abraham is a real person. Not a Parable.

Ok, now what? Is this just a discussion for the fun of it (which, of course, is perfectly fine) or do you think it’s important that people see it is as a real story? I’m not sure where you are coming from on this, so I’m not sure where to go next.

I believe that the story of the Rich man and Lazarus is a true event that occurred because Parables don't use proper names. In the story of the Rich man and Lazarus, Abraham is mentioned who we know is a real life person who existed. Lazarus is a proper name of a man, which also doesn't happen in Parables. The detail of the story could only be interpreted as a real event, not a Parable or Allegory.

Ok. I’m still not sure why you think it’s an important distinction. What’s the problem with someone reading it as a parable?

It's an important distinction because I believe that there is a false teaching that there is no hell. And those who don't believe in hell call this passage an allegory or a parable in order to dismiss its reality. There are other passages that allude to hell also, but this passage is the most detailed account of it.

Interesting, thanks. I don't think I've heard anyone make that argument. I'm confident I know a lot of people who would say this is a parable AND there is a hell. I agree that this piece of text, even if it is a parable, is not some argument against the reality of hell. That would seem odd to say something can't be real because it's mentioned in a parable. The Good Samaritan talks about Jericho and Jerusalem, which are obviously real, as were priests and Levites and Samaritans.

It's not that they believe that it can't be real because it's a parable it's just that they dismissed this passage and Hell altogether. One such religion is the worldwide Church of God another would be the Jehovah's witnesses. A good friend of mine belongs to the worldwide Church of God and is an engineer very smart guy but he doesn't believe in hell. He believes that those who are judged in the end are burned up in an instant. There's no reason for Jesus to use proper names of people who actually existed if it were merely a parable. It is simply a story of an actual event. As a matter of fact, the Bible also says that when Jesus died he went down and ministered to the Spirits that are in Prison. It also says that he went to the heart of the Earth. It says that he went to Paradise. The Bible also says that after the resurrection Jesus led Captivity Captive. It is interpreted to mean that Jesus because of His payment on the cross, those who were in Paradise were now permitted to enter into heaven because the sacrifice had been given. So Jesus took them up into heaven. In the Bible also says that hell was enlarged which means that the Paradise side of Hades is now a place of torment.

 

[dgreen]

The Rich man and Lazarus was not a Parable. It uses proper names, Abraham is a real person. Not a Parable.

Ok, now what? Is this just a discussion for the fun of it (which, of course, is perfectly fine) or do you think it’s important that people see it is as a real story? I’m not sure where you are coming from on this, so I’m not sure where to go next.

I believe that the story of the Rich man and Lazarus is a true event that occurred because Parables don't use proper names. In the story of the Rich man and Lazarus, Abraham is mentioned who we know is a real life person who existed. Lazarus is a proper name of a man, which also doesn't happen in Parables. The detail of the story could only be interpreted as a real event, not a Parable or Allegory.

Ok. I’m still not sure why you think it’s an important distinction. What’s the problem with someone reading it as a parable?

It's an important distinction because I believe that there is a false teaching that there is no hell. And those who don't believe in hell call this passage an allegory or a parable in order to dismiss its reality. There are other passages that allude to hell also, but this passage is the most detailed account of it.

Interesting, thanks. I don't think I've heard anyone make that argument. I'm confident I know a lot of people who would say this is a parable AND there is a hell. I agree that this piece of text, even if it is a parable, is not some argument against the reality of hell. That would seem odd to say something can't be real because it's mentioned in a parable. The Good Samaritan talks about Jericho and Jerusalem, which are obviously real, as were priests and Levites and Samaritans.

It's not that they believe that it can't be real because it's a parable it's just that they dismissed this passage and Hell altogether. One such religion is the worldwide Church of God another would be the Jehovah's witnesses. A good friend of mine belongs to the worldwide Church of God and is an engineer very smart guy but he doesn't believe in hell. He believes that those who are judged in the end are burned up in an instant. There's no reason for Jesus to use proper names of people who actually existed if it were merely a parable. It is simply a story of an actual event. As a matter of fact, the Bible also says that when Jesus died he went down and ministered to the Spirits that are in Prison. It also says that he went to the heart of the Earth. It says that he went to Paradise. The Bible also says that after the resurrection Jesus led Captivity Captive. It is interpreted to mean that Jesus because of His payment on the cross, those who were in Paradise were now permitted to enter into heaven because the sacrifice had been given. So Jesus took them up into heaven. In the Bible also says that hell was enlarged which means that the Paradise side of Hades is now a place of torment.

Hell isn't something I've spent much time looking into. What I will say is the more I learn, the more I realize what I (and even the larger "we") don't know. I think many topics take quite a bit of research to really understand what the Bible says and doesn't say. It's a fun journey to learn more and more!

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

It's not that they believe that it can't be real because it's a parable it's just that they dismissed this passage and Hell altogether. One such religion is the worldwide Church of God another would be the Jehovah's witnesses. A good friend of mine belongs to the worldwide Church of God and is an engineer very smart guy but he doesn't believe in hell. He believes that those who are judged in the end are burned up in an instant. There's no reason for Jesus to use proper names of people who actually existed if it were merely a parable. It is simply a story of an actual event. As a matter of fact, the Bible also says that when Jesus died he went down and ministered to the Spirits that are in Prison. It also says that he went to the heart of the Earth. It says that he went to Paradise. The Bible also says that after the resurrection Jesus led Captivity Captive. It is interpreted to mean that Jesus because of His payment on the cross, those who were in Paradise were now permitted to enter into heaven because the sacrifice had been given. So Jesus took them up into heaven. In the Bible also says that hell was enlarged which means that the Paradise side of Hades is now a place of torment.

None of these passages are evidence that hell ("Sheol" or "Hades") is anything more than death, the grave, the tomb and thus the absence of God's presence. The punishment for disobedience as defined in Genesis 2:17 and Romans 6:24. Beliefs that go beyond this creates a god, that if faith is a gift from God (Ephesians 2:8-9) that one cannot obtain on their own that is inconsistent with the loving God that I find in scripture. A god that I would have a hard, probably impossible time not finding to be evil and immoral and one that I'd hope to have the courage to reject..

A return to non-existence being the price for life seems fair to me. God choosing something better for some (or even all) of his children of creation seems fair to me, and not really my business if that gift isn't mine.

But suppose I am wrong. Why is a belief in the lake of fire so important? It seems counter productive. I can't truly live a life where I am following the commandment that fulfills all others (Romans 13:10 and Galatian 5:14) if I am worried about a mistake condemning me to hell. I need God's grace to free me from such concerns to be the person that God hopes I am. Hell just gets in the way.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

It's not that they believe that it can't be real because it's a parable it's just that they dismissed this passage and Hell altogether. One such religion is the worldwide Church of God another would be the Jehovah's witnesses. A good friend of mine belongs to the worldwide Church of God and is an engineer very smart guy but he doesn't believe in hell. He believes that those who are judged in the end are burned up in an instant. There's no reason for Jesus to use proper names of people who actually existed if it were merely a parable. It is simply a story of an actual event. As a matter of fact, the Bible also says that when Jesus died he went down and ministered to the Spirits that are in Prison. It also says that he went to the heart of the Earth. It says that he went to Paradise. The Bible also says that after the resurrection Jesus led Captivity Captive. It is interpreted to mean that Jesus because of His payment on the cross, those who were in Paradise were now permitted to enter into heaven because the sacrifice had been given. So Jesus took them up into heaven. In the Bible also says that hell was enlarged which means that the Paradise side of Hades is now a place of torment.

None of these passages are evidence that hell ("Sheol" or "Hades") is anything more than death, the grave, the tomb and thus the absence of God's presence. The punishment for disobedience as defined in Genesis 2:17 and Romans 6:24. Beliefs that go beyond this creates a god, that if faith is a gift from God (Ephesians 2:8-9) that one cannot obtain on their own that is inconsistent with the loving God that I find in scripture. A god that I would have a hard, probably impossible time not finding to be evil and immoral and one that I'd hope to have the courage to reject..

A return to non-existence being the price for life seems fair to me. God choosing something better for some (or even all) of his children of creation seems fair to me, and not really my business if that gift isn't mine.

But suppose I am wrong. Why is a belief in the lake of fire so important? It seems counter productive. I can't truly live a life where I am following the commandment that fulfills all others (Romans 13:10 and Galatian 5:14) if I am worried about a mistake condemning me to hell. I need God's grace to free me from such concerns to be the person that God hopes I am. Hell just gets in the way.

Spot on.....God doesn't have the "fear factor" that so many seem to want to apply.

 

[Zow]

It's not that they believe that it can't be real because it's a parable it's just that they dismissed this passage and Hell altogether. One such religion is the worldwide Church of God another would be the Jehovah's witnesses. A good friend of mine belongs to the worldwide Church of God and is an engineer very smart guy but he doesn't believe in hell. He believes that those who are judged in the end are burned up in an instant. There's no reason for Jesus to use proper names of people who actually existed if it were merely a parable. It is simply a story of an actual event. As a matter of fact, the Bible also says that when Jesus died he went down and ministered to the Spirits that are in Prison. It also says that he went to the heart of the Earth. It says that he went to Paradise. The Bible also says that after the resurrection Jesus led Captivity Captive. It is interpreted to mean that Jesus because of His payment on the cross, those who were in Paradise were now permitted to enter into heaven because the sacrifice had been given. So Jesus took them up into heaven. In the Bible also says that hell was enlarged which means that the Paradise side of Hades is now a place of torment.

None of these passages are evidence that hell ("Sheol" or "Hades") is anything more than death, the grave, the tomb and thus the absence of God's presence. The punishment for disobedience as defined in Genesis 2:17 and Romans 6:24. Beliefs that go beyond this creates a god, that if faith is a gift from God (Ephesians 2:8-9) that one cannot obtain on their own that is inconsistent with the loving God that I find in scripture. A god that I would have a hard, probably impossible time not finding to be evil and immoral and one that I'd hope to have the courage to reject..

A return to non-existence being the price for life seems fair to me. God choosing something better for some (or even all) of his children of creation seems fair to me, and not really my business if that gift isn't mine.

But suppose I am wrong. Why is a belief in the lake of fire so important? It seems counter productive. I can't truly live a life where I am following the commandment that fulfills all others (Romans 13:10 and Galatian 5:14) if I am worried about a mistake condemning me to hell. I need God's grace to free me from such concerns to be the person that God hopes I am. Hell just gets in the way.

Spot on.....God doesn't have the "fear factor" that so many seem to want to apply.

You obviously didn't grow up Catholic.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

It's not that they believe that it can't be real because it's a parable it's just that they dismissed this passage and Hell altogether. One such religion is the worldwide Church of God another would be the Jehovah's witnesses. A good friend of mine belongs to the worldwide Church of God and is an engineer very smart guy but he doesn't believe in hell. He believes that those who are judged in the end are burned up in an instant. There's no reason for Jesus to use proper names of people who actually existed if it were merely a parable. It is simply a story of an actual event. As a matter of fact, the Bible also says that when Jesus died he went down and ministered to the Spirits that are in Prison. It also says that he went to the heart of the Earth. It says that he went to Paradise. The Bible also says that after the resurrection Jesus led Captivity Captive. It is interpreted to mean that Jesus because of His payment on the cross, those who were in Paradise were now permitted to enter into heaven because the sacrifice had been given. So Jesus took them up into heaven. In the Bible also says that hell was enlarged which means that the Paradise side of Hades is now a place of torment.

None of these passages are evidence that hell ("Sheol" or "Hades") is anything more than death, the grave, the tomb and thus the absence of God's presence. The punishment for disobedience as defined in Genesis 2:17 and Romans 6:24. Beliefs that go beyond this creates a god, that if faith is a gift from God (Ephesians 2:8-9) that one cannot obtain on their own that is inconsistent with the loving God that I find in scripture. A god that I would have a hard, probably impossible time not finding to be evil and immoral and one that I'd hope to have the courage to reject..

A return to non-existence being the price for life seems fair to me. God choosing something better for some (or even all) of his children of creation seems fair to me, and not really my business if that gift isn't mine.

But suppose I am wrong. Why is a belief in the lake of fire so important? It seems counter productive. I can't truly live a life where I am following the commandment that fulfills all others (Romans 13:10 and Galatian 5:14) if I am worried about a mistake condemning me to hell. I need God's grace to free me from such concerns to be the person that God hopes I am. Hell just gets in the way.

Spot on.....God doesn't have the "fear factor" that so many seem to want to apply.

You obviously didn't grow up Catholic.

Thank God

 

[Paddington]

It's not that they believe that it can't be real because it's a parable it's just that they dismissed this passage and Hell altogether. One such religion is the worldwide Church of God another would be the Jehovah's witnesses. A good friend of mine belongs to the worldwide Church of God and is an engineer very smart guy but he doesn't believe in hell. He believes that those who are judged in the end are burned up in an instant. There's no reason for Jesus to use proper names of people who actually existed if it were merely a parable. It is simply a story of an actual event. As a matter of fact, the Bible also says that when Jesus died he went down and ministered to the Spirits that are in Prison. It also says that he went to the heart of the Earth. It says that he went to Paradise. The Bible also says that after the resurrection Jesus led Captivity Captive. It is interpreted to mean that Jesus because of His payment on the cross, those who were in Paradise were now permitted to enter into heaven because the sacrifice had been given. So Jesus took them up into heaven. In the Bible also says that hell was enlarged which means that the Paradise side of Hades is now a place of torment.

None of these passages are evidence that hell ("Sheol" or "Hades") is anything more than death, the grave, the tomb and thus the absence of God's presence. The punishment for disobedience as defined in Genesis 2:17 and Romans 6:24. Beliefs that go beyond this creates a god, that if faith is a gift from God (Ephesians 2:8-9) that one cannot obtain on their own that is inconsistent with the loving God that I find in scripture. A god that I would have a hard, probably impossible time not finding to be evil and immoral and one that I'd hope to have the courage to reject..

A return to non-existence being the price for life seems fair to me. God choosing something better for some (or even all) of his children of creation seems fair to me, and not really my business if that gift isn't mine.

But suppose I am wrong. Why is a belief in the lake of fire so important? It seems counter productive. I can't truly live a life where I am following the commandment that fulfills all others (Romans 13:10 and Galatian 5:14) if I am worried about a mistake condemning me to hell. I need God's grace to free me from such concerns to be the person that God hopes I am. Hell just gets in the way.

If you look at the story it's self, it gives a lot of evidence of hell being a real place of torment. The man describes himself as being "tormented in this flame". That's something far different than the grave. Other Bible verses Jesus says "Where their worm doesn't die and the fire is not quenched". In Revelation, the Lake of fire is described and it says that the devil and the false prophet are cast there. It says that they shall be tormented day and night forever and ever. Yes He is a loving God, but He is also a God of Justice. He must punish disobedience to His Laws. By sending His Son to die for us and take our Punishment, He made a legal loop hole for us to be saved from that awful place, created for the devil and his angels, but we can only activate His Pardon through Faith in Jesus Christ and His Sacrifice for us. If you truly trust in Christ and HIs Sacrifice on the cross to save you, you won't go to hell because you are forgiven of your sins, past, present and future. You don't lose it if you screw up. God will punish those who are His own in this life though. I agree that we do need God's Grace. We access God's Grace through our Faith, NOT our works:

Luke 16:24
And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

Mark 9:44
Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

Revelation 20:10
And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Revelation 20:15
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Romans 5:2
By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

 

[Zow]

He must punish disobedience to His Laws.

Why must H/he do so? I see no rational reason for sending somebody to eternal damnation for disobeying one law other than raging narcissism.

 

[Zow]

"Hi Son, I love you, but you called me a name once and weren't sorry for it so... eternity in a fire pit for you! I love you, though, and I'm super just!"

If that were my parenting style I should have the Department of Child Safety called on me and the kid removed from my care.

 

[Paddington]

"Hi Son, I love you, but you called me a name once and weren't sorry for it so... eternity in a fire pit for you! I love you, though, and I'm super just!"

If that were my parenting style I should have the Department of Child Safety called on me and the kid removed from my care.

You are making the assumption that people are born into this world as Sons and Daughter's of God. They aren't. People were created that way, yes, but because of the fall of man, sin has separated us from God. The only way to become a Son (or Daughter) of God is by Faith in Jesus Christ and His sacrifice on the cross for our sins.

John 1:12
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

1 John 3:10
In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

Acts 13:10
And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?

God doesn't want to send anyone there, even though legally, as King of the Universe, He must send sinners there. He went so far out of His way to save us that He sent His only Son, to leave His throne in heaven, being worshipped by innumerable angels, riches and comfort, to be humiliated, suffer and die for our sins and then rise from the dead, so that if we trust in Him as your Sacrifice for your sins, you will be saved. Read this first post.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Just believe what makes you happy, be the best person you can. For me, if that isn't good enough for whatever comes next...

Some people feel the need for religion and God, others do not. Since no one really knows if there is an afterlife believe what you want and don't look down on others for what they believe.

I liked both of these posts so

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

It's not that they believe that it can't be real because it's a parable it's just that they dismissed this passage and Hell altogether. One such religion is the worldwide Church of God another would be the Jehovah's witnesses. A good friend of mine belongs to the worldwide Church of God and is an engineer very smart guy but he doesn't believe in hell. He believes that those who are judged in the end are burned up in an instant. There's no reason for Jesus to use proper names of people who actually existed if it were merely a parable. It is simply a story of an actual event. As a matter of fact, the Bible also says that when Jesus died he went down and ministered to the Spirits that are in Prison. It also says that he went to the heart of the Earth. It says that he went to Paradise. The Bible also says that after the resurrection Jesus led Captivity Captive. It is interpreted to mean that Jesus because of His payment on the cross, those who were in Paradise were now permitted to enter into heaven because the sacrifice had been given. So Jesus took them up into heaven. In the Bible also says that hell was enlarged which means that the Paradise side of Hades is now a place of torment.

None of these passages are evidence that hell ("Sheol" or "Hades") is anything more than death, the grave, the tomb and thus the absence of God's presence. The punishment for disobedience as defined in Genesis 2:17 and Romans 6:24. Beliefs that go beyond this creates a god, that if faith is a gift from God (Ephesians 2:8-9) that one cannot obtain on their own that is inconsistent with the loving God that I find in scripture. A god that I would have a hard, probably impossible time not finding to be evil and immoral and one that I'd hope to have the courage to reject..

A return to non-existence being the price for life seems fair to me. God choosing something better for some (or even all) of his children of creation seems fair to me, and not really my business if that gift isn't mine.

But suppose I am wrong. Why is a belief in the lake of fire so important? It seems counter productive. I can't truly live a life where I am following the commandment that fulfills all others (Romans 13:10 and Galatian 5:14) if I am worried about a mistake condemning me to hell. I need God's grace to free me from such concerns to be the person that God hopes I am. Hell just gets in the way.

If you look at the story it's self, it gives a lot of evidence of hell being a real place of torment. The man describes himself as being "tormented in this flame". That's something far different than the grave. Other Bible verses Jesus says "Where their worm doesn't die and the fire is not quenched". In Revelation, the Lake of fire is described and it says that the devil and the false prophet are cast there. It says that they shall be tormented day and night forever and ever. Yes He is a loving God, but He is also a God of Justice. He must punish disobedience to His Laws. By sending His Son to die for us and take our Punishment, He made a legal loop hole for us to be saved from that awful place, created for the devil and his angels, but we can only activate His Pardon through Faith in Jesus Christ and His Sacrifice for us. If you truly trust in Christ and HIs Sacrifice on the cross to save you, you won't go to hell because you are forgiven of your sins, past, present and future. You don't lose it if you screw up. God will punish those who are His own in this life though. I agree that we do need God's Grace. We access God's Grace through our Faith, NOT our works:

Luke 16:24
And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

Mark 9:44
Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

Revelation 20:10
And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Revelation 20:15
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Romans 5:2
By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

God - the rich in mercy, abounding in steadfast love, truth revealing, peace sustaining God - that one and only God thinks (or ever thought) that condemning you and I to sin before we are even born because Adam was disobedient, sin that we cannot free ourselves from, sin that enslaves even the best of us, sin that causes us to build walls around ourselves to keep everyone - and God out, etc., etc requires being condemned again for failing to do the impossible of avoiding that sin to eternal torment is justice? And that this "justice" needs a "loop hole" for God to do the right thing? A "loop hole" - faith - which we cannot achieve on our own, but is a gift?

Really?

Come judgment day, if this is true then God has a lot of explaining to do!

But while I get that fear of hell motivates some weak souls into being better people, in aggregate I again believe it is counterproductive if the goal is for God's people to take care of God's children - one another. It is counterproductive to creating God's kingdom here on earth. It is counterproductive for God's church. Let them "...know we are Christians by our love" rather than our fears of hell.

 

[Paddington]

It's not that they believe that it can't be real because it's a parable it's just that they dismissed this passage and Hell altogether. One such religion is the worldwide Church of God another would be the Jehovah's witnesses. A good friend of mine belongs to the worldwide Church of God and is an engineer very smart guy but he doesn't believe in hell. He believes that those who are judged in the end are burned up in an instant. There's no reason for Jesus to use proper names of people who actually existed if it were merely a parable. It is simply a story of an actual event. As a matter of fact, the Bible also says that when Jesus died he went down and ministered to the Spirits that are in Prison. It also says that he went to the heart of the Earth. It says that he went to Paradise. The Bible also says that after the resurrection Jesus led Captivity Captive. It is interpreted to mean that Jesus because of His payment on the cross, those who were in Paradise were now permitted to enter into heaven because the sacrifice had been given. So Jesus took them up into heaven. In the Bible also says that hell was enlarged which means that the Paradise side of Hades is now a place of torment.

None of these passages are evidence that hell ("Sheol" or "Hades") is anything more than death, the grave, the tomb and thus the absence of God's presence. The punishment for disobedience as defined in Genesis 2:17 and Romans 6:24. Beliefs that go beyond this creates a god, that if faith is a gift from God (Ephesians 2:8-9) that one cannot obtain on their own that is inconsistent with the loving God that I find in scripture. A god that I would have a hard, probably impossible time not finding to be evil and immoral and one that I'd hope to have the courage to reject..

A return to non-existence being the price for life seems fair to me. God choosing something better for some (or even all) of his children of creation seems fair to me, and not really my business if that gift isn't mine.

But suppose I am wrong. Why is a belief in the lake of fire so important? It seems counter productive. I can't truly live a life where I am following the commandment that fulfills all others (Romans 13:10 and Galatian 5:14) if I am worried about a mistake condemning me to hell. I need God's grace to free me from such concerns to be the person that God hopes I am. Hell just gets in the way.

If you look at the story it's self, it gives a lot of evidence of hell being a real place of torment. The man describes himself as being "tormented in this flame". That's something far different than the grave. Other Bible verses Jesus says "Where their worm doesn't die and the fire is not quenched". In Revelation, the Lake of fire is described and it says that the devil and the false prophet are cast there. It says that they shall be tormented day and night forever and ever. Yes He is a loving God, but He is also a God of Justice. He must punish disobedience to His Laws. By sending His Son to die for us and take our Punishment, He made a legal loop hole for us to be saved from that awful place, created for the devil and his angels, but we can only activate His Pardon through Faith in Jesus Christ and His Sacrifice for us. If you truly trust in Christ and HIs Sacrifice on the cross to save you, you won't go to hell because you are forgiven of your sins, past, present and future. You don't lose it if you screw up. God will punish those who are His own in this life though. I agree that we do need God's Grace. We access God's Grace through our Faith, NOT our works:

Luke 16:24
And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

Mark 9:44
Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

Revelation 20:10
And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Revelation 20:15
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Romans 5:2
By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

God - the rich in mercy, abounding in steadfast love, truth revealing, peace sustaining God - that one and only God thinks (or ever thought) that condemning you and I to sin before we are even born because Adam was disobedient, sin that we cannot free ourselves from, sin that enslaves even the best of us, sin that causes us to build walls around ourselves to keep everyone - and God out, etc., etc requires being condemned again for failing to do the impossible of avoiding that sin to eternal torment is justice? And that this "justice" needs a "loop hole" for God to do the right thing? A "loop hole" - faith - which we cannot achieve on our own, but is a gift?

Really?

Come judgment day, if this is true then God has a lot of explaining to do!

But while I get that fear of hell motivates some weak souls into being better people, in aggregate I again believe it is counterproductive if the goal is for God's people to take care of God's children - one another. It is counterproductive to creating God's kingdom here on earth. It is counterproductive for God's church. Let them "...know we are Christians by our love" rather than our fears of hell.

 

[Paddington]

It's not that they believe that it can't be real because it's a parable it's just that they dismissed this passage and Hell altogether. One such religion is the worldwide Church of God another would be the Jehovah's witnesses. A good friend of mine belongs to the worldwide Church of God and is an engineer very smart guy but he doesn't believe in hell. He believes that those who are judged in the end are burned up in an instant. There's no reason for Jesus to use proper names of people who actually existed if it were merely a parable. It is simply a story of an actual event. As a matter of fact, the Bible also says that when Jesus died he went down and ministered to the Spirits that are in Prison. It also says that he went to the heart of the Earth. It says that he went to Paradise. The Bible also says that after the resurrection Jesus led Captivity Captive. It is interpreted to mean that Jesus because of His payment on the cross, those who were in Paradise were now permitted to enter into heaven because the sacrifice had been given. So Jesus took them up into heaven. In the Bible also says that hell was enlarged which means that the Paradise side of Hades is now a place of torment.

None of these passages are evidence that hell ("Sheol" or "Hades") is anything more than death, the grave, the tomb and thus the absence of God's presence. The punishment for disobedience as defined in Genesis 2:17 and Romans 6:24. Beliefs that go beyond this creates a god, that if faith is a gift from God (Ephesians 2:8-9) that one cannot obtain on their own that is inconsistent with the loving God that I find in scripture. A god that I would have a hard, probably impossible time not finding to be evil and immoral and one that I'd hope to have the courage to reject..

A return to non-existence being the price for life seems fair to me. God choosing something better for some (or even all) of his children of creation seems fair to me, and not really my business if that gift isn't mine.

But suppose I am wrong. Why is a belief in the lake of fire so important? It seems counter productive. I can't truly live a life where I am following the commandment that fulfills all others (Romans 13:10 and Galatian 5:14) if I am worried about a mistake condemning me to hell. I need God's grace to free me from such concerns to be the person that God hopes I am. Hell just gets in the way.

If you look at the story it's self, it gives a lot of evidence of hell being a real place of torment. The man describes himself as being "tormented in this flame". That's something far different than the grave. Other Bible verses Jesus says "Where their worm doesn't die and the fire is not quenched". In Revelation, the Lake of fire is described and it says that the devil and the false prophet are cast there. It says that they shall be tormented day and night forever and ever. Yes He is a loving God, but He is also a God of Justice. He must punish disobedience to His Laws. By sending His Son to die for us and take our Punishment, He made a legal loop hole for us to be saved from that awful place, created for the devil and his angels, but we can only activate His Pardon through Faith in Jesus Christ and His Sacrifice for us. If you truly trust in Christ and HIs Sacrifice on the cross to save you, you won't go to hell because you are forgiven of your sins, past, present and future. You don't lose it if you screw up. God will punish those who are His own in this life though. I agree that we do need God's Grace. We access God's Grace through our Faith, NOT our works:

Luke 16:24
And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

Mark 9:44
Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

Revelation 20:10
And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Revelation 20:15
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Romans 5:2
By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

God - the rich in mercy, abounding in steadfast love, truth revealing, peace sustaining God - that one and only God thinks (or ever thought) that condemning you and I to sin before we are even born because Adam was disobedient, sin that we cannot free ourselves from, sin that enslaves even the best of us, sin that causes us to build walls around ourselves to keep everyone - and God out, etc., etc requires being condemned again for failing to do the impossible of avoiding that sin to eternal torment is justice? And that this "justice" needs a "loop hole" for God to do the right thing? A "loop hole" - faith - which we cannot achieve on our own, but is a gift?

Really?

Come judgment day, if this is true then God has a lot of explaining to do!

But while I get that fear of hell motivates some weak souls into being better people, in aggregate I again believe it is counterproductive if the goal is for God's people to take care of God's children - one another. It is counterproductive to creating God's kingdom here on earth. It is counterproductive for God's church. Let them "...know we are Christians by our love" rather than our fears of hell.

It's not exactly the way you are saying it. Yes, we have a sin nature because we were all "In Adam" when he sinned against God, therefore, his sin nature was passed upon us all. As a result of that sin nature, we all sin.

Romans 3:23 (KJV)​

"for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God"

Romans 5:12 (KJV)​

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"

With all of that said, the only people who will go to hell are those who fail to accept the Pardon that God has already provided for us through Faith in Jesus Christ and His Sacrifice in our place on the cross for our sins. No one has to go to hell, Salvation is extended to all men who will accept it by Faith in Jesus Christ and His Sacrifice.

I am sorry if you don't understand the Legal reasons for all of this, but there are Laws in heaven that must be obeyed and God Himself must enforce them Legally. He must be fair and just in His Judgement because His perfect nature demands it.

God has literally done everything He can to save us and He has been more than fair with us.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

With all of that said, the only people who will go to hell are those who fail to accept the Pardon that God has already provided for us through Faith in Jesus Christ

Faith is not a choice; it is a gift.

Ephesians 2:8-9 (even in the King James Version)​

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

 

[Paddington]

With all of that said, the only people who will go to hell are those who fail to accept the Pardon that God has already provided for us through Faith in Jesus Christ

Faith is not a choice; it is a gift.

Ephesians 2:8-9 (even in the King James Version)​

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

That is not what this verse is sayin. Salvation is the gift of God. Faith is a choice to believe God when He reveals it to us. I do agree that a man must be drawn to God by the Holy Spirit, but you are misinterpreting this passage. Salvation is the topic, therefore, Salvation is the gift of God. Grace is something that God does for you that you cannot do for yourself. That is the gift of God. Faith is our choice to believe God. We gain access to God's Grace through our choice of Faith (Believing and Trusting God)

Romans 5:2 (KJV)​

by whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

Ephesians 3:12 (KJV)​

in whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him.

 

[dkp993]

"Hi Son, I love you, but you called me a name once and weren't sorry for it so... eternity in a fire pit for you! I love you, though, and I'm super just!"

If that were my parenting style I should have the Department of Child Safety called on me and the kid removed from my care.

Nothing says the ultimate true beautiful love like love me or I torture you for all eternity.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I am sorry if you don't understand the Legal reasons for all of this, but there are Laws in heaven that must be obeyed and God Himself must enforce them Legally.

I'm pretty comfortable in my belief that the Jesus interactions with the Pharisees and the writings of Paul reject this legal framework. It would likely be impossible to convince me that the epistles and these interactions don't teach us to reject the idea that there is some "letter of the law" but instead we should embrace the "spirit of the law". And while the Pharisees are the legalistic side in the gospels, Tim once had a thread which stated that the "greatest Pharisee" said 50 years before Jesus' birth that all of scripture can be summed up by "Do unto others", the golden rule, which Jesus (and Paul) used the Leviticus 19:18 equivalent.

 

[Paddington]

"Hi Son, I love you, but you called me a name once and weren't sorry for it so... eternity in a fire pit for you! I love you, though, and I'm super just!"

If that were my parenting style I should have the Department of Child Safety called on me and the kid removed from my care.

Nothing says the ultimate true beautiful love like love me or I torture you for all eternity.

So, if you were to live in the days of King Caesar and you were his child, but you said, I hate you and won't serve you as my King. I will do as I please and I won't obey your laws. What do you think will happen to you? Will he just allow you to do what you want? Could his Kingdom stand with such people who live lawlessly and disobey the Governing Authorities? What will happen to you in ANY Kingdom with that attitude?

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

With all of that said, the only people who will go to hell are those who fail to accept the Pardon that God has already provided for us through Faith in Jesus Christ

Faith is not a choice; it is a gift.

Ephesians 2:8-9 (even in the King James Version)​

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

That is not what this verse is sayin. Salvation is the gift of God. Faith is a choice to believe God when He reveals it to us. I do agree that a man must be drawn to God by the Holy Spirit, but you are misinterpreting this passage. Salvation is the topic, therefore, Salvation is the gift of God. Grace is something that God does for you that you cannot do for yourself. That is the gift of God. Faith is our choice to believe God. We gain access to God's Grace through our choice of Faith (Believing and Trusting God)

Romans 5:2 (KJV)​

by whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

Ephesians 3:12 (KJV)​

in whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him.

Faith is a gift from God is not exactly a novel idea that I dreamt up. Nor is it exclusive to a single passage.

2 Peter 1:1
to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ

Philippians 1:29
For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;

Acts 3:16
... the faith which is by him ...

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

"Hi Son, I love you, but you called me a name once and weren't sorry for it so... eternity in a fire pit for you! I love you, though, and I'm super just!"

If that were my parenting style I should have the Department of Child Safety called on me and the kid removed from my care.

Nothing says the ultimate true beautiful love like love me or I torture you for all eternity.

So, if you were to live in the days of King Caesar and you were his child, but you said, I hate you and won't serve you as my King. I will do as I please and I won't obey your laws. What do you think will happen to you? Will he just allow you to do what you want? Could his Kingdom stand with such people who live lawlessly and disobey the Governing Authorities? What will happen to you in ANY Kingdom with that attitude?

I am sorry, but I don't create God in Caesar's image.

ETA: And I don't believe that Caesar would punish me in this scenario beyond death. ETA2: Other than maybe symbolically to offer me as an example to others.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Ultimately sin is turning inward, making everything about oneself. Nothing seems to me to be more looking inward than living one's life for salvation. We are commanded to look outward, to take care of one another in the here and now, to reclaim this earth as God's Kingdom through that love. That how we treat one another is how we treat God. If we love one another and have a belief in God, then we show love to God. Jesus' sacrifice is to give us the freedom found in grace, found in forgiveness for not being perfect, for not being God. Jesus' sacrifice was not to satisfy God's blood thirst, but to satisfy us that the law was never the strait jacket legalistic code we turned it into. It is the freedom to try to have the courage to live a "service above self" life. Sure, we will fail and fail often, but through forgiveness we can try again.

"Worthy is Christ the lamb, whose blood set us free to be people of God"

Good night! Have a little faith and love thy neighbor. Everything else should take care of itself.

 

[Zow]

I am sorry if you don't understand the Legal reasons for all of this, but there are Laws in heaven that must be obeyed and God Himself must enforce them Legally. He must be fair and just in His Judgement because His perfect nature demands it.

I assume G/god created those laws.* Ergo, since G/god created those laws, H/he has the option of changing them. As such, your claim that H/he must enforce them makes no logical sense since H/he has the option to change said laws. Accordingly, if H/he rationally deduced them to be harsh and unfair (which objectively they just are), H/he is actually the one who can change them and isn't bound by them. In other words, H/he very much can decide that it may just be a touch unfair to create something with the ability to do X,** to then eternally damn them for doing X.

Yes, I have read your first post several times. You've started several threads over the years and called everyone to read the post several times. Repetition, though, does not change logical fallacies in the same message.

*I'm not going to errantly capitalize a word that should not be capitalized. On that note, since we are talking in a legal context whereby you claim somebody must enforce a strict set of laws, judgment is not spelled as "judgement."

**"X" in this context is to create a law that everybody must have faith in H/him - despite create everybody with the ability to engage in critical thinking whereby one could rationalize deduce (even if perhaps wrongly) that H/he doesn't exist - or face eternal damnation. That's like the legal equivalent of giving the death penalty to somebody who commits a misdemeanor just once.

 

[Zow]

"Hi Son, I love you, but you called me a name once and weren't sorry for it so... eternity in a fire pit for you! I love you, though, and I'm super just!"

If that were my parenting style I should have the Department of Child Safety called on me and the kid removed from my care.

Nothing says the ultimate true beautiful love like love me or I torture you for all eternity.

So, if you were to live in the days of King Caesar and you were his child, but you said, I hate you and won't serve you as my King. I will do as I please and I won't obey your laws. What do you think will happen to you? Will he just allow you to do what you want? Could his Kingdom stand with such people who live lawlessly and disobey the Governing Authorities? What will happen to you in ANY Kingdom with that attitude?

But in the scenario we are discussing the only law being broken is taking the master's name in vain basically. Nobody is suggesting our hypothetical hell-goer is breaking all of G/god's laws here. I'm specifically focusing on the law that requires the created to basically never talk ill of the creator despite the created being given the ability to critically think about the laws and intents of the creator as this is the most nonsensical, narcissistic, and, to put it bluntly, evil law G/god apparently put in place.

I also presume you live in the United States or, if not, at least not in some place like North Korea. As such, you live in a "kingdom" where many people can freely criticize their "kings" or not have faith in them and yet that "kingdom" can thrive just fine (or, at the very least, not nosedive into chaos and anarchy). In the USA particularly, the "king" recognizes that people should actually have a fundamental right to criticize the "king."

Heck, we have this ability in this forum to criticize our "king." I imagine Joe would take no umbrage to somebody like me criticizing him for instituting a "law" provided I did so pursuant to critical thinking and not just to do it out of spite or hate. For example, I could certainly see me saying something like, "Hey, Joe, while there was some juvenile dreck in the Politics Forum I nonetheless believe there was actually positive enough discourse and current news discussed that it would be a mistake to close the forum and ban politics. I think you made a mistake for it." I may even say this publicly. And Joe would likely respond with, "I appreciate your input, Woz, but I disagree and have made a business decision to institute this "law." I would then likely reflect on that for a moment, recognize that I still want to put a part of his "kingdom," we would shake hands, and both move on just fine. If not obvious, I would not be sent to eternal banmnation (couldn't resist the pun) simply because I analyzed one of his laws in my head and criticized him for it.

 

[dkp993]

"Hi Son, I love you, but you called me a name once and weren't sorry for it so... eternity in a fire pit for you! I love you, though, and I'm super just!"

If that were my parenting style I should have the Department of Child Safety called on me and the kid removed from my care.

Nothing says the ultimate true beautiful love like love me or I torture you for all eternity.

So, if you were to live in the days of King Caesar and you were his child, but you said, I hate you and won't serve you as my King. I will do as I please and I won't obey your laws. What do you think will happen to you? Will he just allow you to do what you want? Could his Kingdom stand with such people who live lawlessly and disobey the Governing Authorities? What will happen to you in ANY Kingdom with that attitude?

But in the scenario we are discussing the only law being broken is taking the master's name in vain basically. Nobody is suggesting our hypothetical hell-goer is breaking all of G/god's laws here. I'm specifically focusing on the law that requires the created to basically never talk ill of the creator despite the created being given the ability to critically think about the laws and intents of the creator as this is the most nonsensical, narcissistic, and, to put it bluntly, evil law G/god apparently put in place.

I also presume you live in the United States or, if not, at least not in some place like North Korea. As such, you live in a "kingdom" where many people can freely criticize their "kings" or not have faith in them and yet that "kingdom" can thrive just fine (or, at the very least, not nosedive into chaos and anarchy). In the USA particularly, the "king" recognizes that people should actually have a fundamental right to criticize the "king."

Heck, we have this ability in this forum to criticize our "king." I imagine Joe would take no umbrage to somebody like me criticizing him for instituting a "law" provided I did so pursuant to critical thinking and not just to do it out of spite or hate. For example, I could certainly see me saying something like, "Hey, Joe, while there was some juvenile dreck in the Politics Forum I nonetheless believe there was actually positive enough discourse and current news discussed that it would be a mistake to close the forum and ban politics. I think you made a mistake for it." I may even say this publicly. And Joe would likely respond with, "I appreciate your input, Woz, but I disagree and have made a business decision to institute this "law." I would then likely reflect on that for a moment, recognize that I still want to put a part of his "kingdom," we would shake hands, and both move on just fine. If not obvious, I would not be sent to eternal banmnation (couldn't resist the pun) simply because I analyzed one of his laws in my head and criticized him for it.

Well said. My example is far less eloquent and likely a far more provocative, but the hell narrative reeks to me of the serial abuser (of wife/girlfriend/child etc etc) who blames the abuse on how they just “love them so much” and if they “would only do as I said I wouldn’t have do this” (dole out the abuse). It’s really all your fault because I love you so much.

 

[-fish-]

"Hi Son, I love you, but you called me a name once and weren't sorry for it so... eternity in a fire pit for you! I love you, though, and I'm super just!"

If that were my parenting style I should have the Department of Child Safety called on me and the kid removed from my care.

Nothing says the ultimate true beautiful love like love me or I torture you for all eternity.

So, if you were to live in the days of King Caesar and you were his child, but you said, I hate you and won't serve you as my King. I will do as I please and I won't obey your laws. What do you think will happen to you? Will he just allow you to do what you want? Could his Kingdom stand with such people who live lawlessly and disobey the Governing Authorities? What will happen to you in ANY Kingdom with that attitude?

huh. seems like you may be forgetting the prodigal son.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

I am sorry if you don't understand the Legal reasons for all of this, but there are Laws in heaven that must be obeyed and God Himself must enforce them Legally.

I'm pretty comfortable in my belief that the Jesus interactions with the Pharisees and the writings of Paul reject this legal framework. It would likely be impossible to convince me that the epistles and these interactions don't teach us to reject the idea that there is some "letter of the law" but instead we should embrace the "spirit of the law". And while the Pharisees are the legalistic side in the gospels, Tim once had a thread which stated that the "greatest Pharisee" said 50 years before Jesus' birth that all of scripture can be summed up by "Do unto others", the golden rule, which Jesus (and Paul) used the Leviticus 19:18 equivalent.

 

[dgreen]

"Hi Son, I love you, but you called me a name once and weren't sorry for it so... eternity in a fire pit for you! I love you, though, and I'm super just!"

If that were my parenting style I should have the Department of Child Safety called on me and the kid removed from my care.

Nothing says the ultimate true beautiful love like love me or I torture you for all eternity.

So, if you were to live in the days of King Caesar and you were his child, but you said, I hate you and won't serve you as my King. I will do as I please and I won't obey your laws. What do you think will happen to you? Will he just allow you to do what you want? Could his Kingdom stand with such people who live lawlessly and disobey the Governing Authorities? What will happen to you in ANY Kingdom with that attitude?

I am sorry, but I don't create God in Caesar's image.

ETA: And I don't believe that Caesar would punish me in this scenario beyond death. ETA2: Other than maybe symbolically to offer me as an example to others.

Yeah, I think God and the Biblical authors use king/kingdom imagery because it is something they could relate to, but I don't think that means the God of Israel was just like Pharaoh or Caesar. In fact, I think many times the point in drawing comparisons between God and kings was to show how this God is different. Yes, there is judgment in pursuit of justice, and there's also forgiveness and mercy and love. What does God's justice look like? How does he accomplish that? Who/what is God judging and why is he judging? What is he trying to accomplish?

 

[dgreen]

With all of that said, the only people who will go to hell are those who fail to accept the Pardon that God has already provided for us through Faith in Jesus Christ

Faith is not a choice; it is a gift.

Ephesians 2:8-9 (even in the King James Version)​

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

That is not what this verse is sayin. Salvation is the gift of God. Faith is a choice to believe God when He reveals it to us. I do agree that a man must be drawn to God by the Holy Spirit, but you are misinterpreting this passage. Salvation is the topic, therefore, Salvation is the gift of God. Grace is something that God does for you that you cannot do for yourself. That is the gift of God. Faith is our choice to believe God. We gain access to God's Grace through our choice of Faith (Believing and Trusting God)

Romans 5:2 (KJV)​

by whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

Ephesians 3:12 (KJV)​

in whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him.

Are you familiar with the debate around how to translate "pistis christou"? It's currently in English translations as "faith in Christ" as in . However, there are opinions that it should be "faithfulness of Christ". I don't know Greek at all, so I can't speak to why this has been proposed. Someone I trust predicts that our translations will probably change within 20 years. And, no doubt, many Christians will freak out. We don't like when our translations change and this is potentially a big one.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

huh. seems like you may be forgetting the prodigal son.

Speaking of which. There are two fascinating questions to ask with this story.

1) Who in the story do you most relate with?

• The Father
• The Youngest Son
• The Oldest Son

I confess that I originally understood the oldest son the best and had empathy for his resentment. It took longer to understand the Father, and the youngest son just has never been me. Not to paint with too broad of a brush, but I suspect the "wretched souls that were lost before they were found and were born again" relate best to the youngest son. And I think as a result they are the loudest in their joy (ETA: Luke 7:47 I'm drawing a blank on the gospel story I want to put here in the sense that I know Jesus says something like some have more to be forgiven somewhere) and most wanting to spread that story of salvation. That's fine, especially if that leads to finding the message of taking care of each other to show that gratitude for this gift.

2) Why was the youngest son hungry? (First link I could find.)

• He squandered it all
• There was a famine
• He was hungry and no one offered to help

While I think the answer is "yes" as in all three, I'm inclined to really like the East African answer. And of course I think two of the three are the same - selfishness.

 

[dgreen]

huh. seems like you may be forgetting the prodigal son.

Speaking of which. There are two fascinating questions to ask with this story.

1) Who in the story do you most relate with?

• The Father
• The Youngest Son
• The Oldest Son

I confess that I originally understood the oldest son the best and had empathy for his resentment. It took longer to understand the Father, and the youngest son just has never been me. Not to paint with too broad of a brush, but I suspect the "wretched souls that were lost before they were found and were born again" relate best to the youngest son. And I think as a result they are the loudest in their joy (ETA: Luke 7:47 I'm drawing a blank on the gospel story I want to put here in the sense that I know Jesus says something like some have more to be forgiven somewhere) and most wanting to spread that story of salvation. That's fine, especially if that leads to finding the message of taking care of each other to show that gratitude for this gift.

2) Why was the youngest son hungry? (First link I could find.)

• He squandered it all
• There was a famine
• He was hungry and no one offered to help

While I think the answer is "yes" as in all three, I'm inclined to really like the East African answer. And of course I think two of the three are the same - selfishness.

This is such a great, rich parable. I'll go primarily with the Jordanians.

I think this parable is best thought as the ending of a much larger parable. If we read the entire chapter as one parable broken down into 3 (or maybe 4?) sub-parables, we see the primary theme of being lost and found. Being lost is the primary problem and we see the repeated solution is being found.

The first section is the parable of the lost sheep. Here we have a 100 to 1 ratio. The shepherd leaves the 99 to find the 1 and bring him back and there's rejoicing that he's been returned.

The second section is the parable of the lost coin. Here we have a 10 to 1 ratio. The woman searches until she finds the 1 lost coin and there's rejoicing after it's been found.

The third section is the parable of the prodigal son. Here we have a 2 to 1 ratio. The 1 wants to leave the father and the father allows it, giving the son what he thinks he needs in order to live. The 1 finds himself dying of hunger and decides to return to the father. The father is waiting for him to return, has compassion on him when he sees him, and welcomes him back. There's rejoicing that he has returned and is now found.

And then we have another section and what could be called the parable of the older son as we narrow down to a ratio of 1 to 1. The older son is the only one left in the story. The sheep was lost away from the shepherd. The coin was lost inside the woman's house. The younger son was lost away from the father's house. The older son was lost, in a sense, in the father's house.

The chapter starts by telling us the audience is tax collectors, sinners, and Pharisees. The Pharisees are grumbling about how Jesus welcomes these lost tax collectors and sinners. Therefore, Jesus tells parables about the importance of the lost being found. With the lost sheep, he alludes to Ezekiel 34 and how Israel's shepherds failed to seek the lost sheep, so God stepped in and did it himself. Jesus also mirrors a story out of Jewish oral tradition that discusses why Moses was chosen to lead God's people. With the prodigal son, Jesus alludes to Esau and Jacob. Jacob was scared to reunite with Esau. But, as they approached each other, it was Esau (the older brother) who ran to meet Jacob (the younger brother), hugged him, and kissed. In the parable, it is the father, not the older son, who runs, hugs, and kisses the younger son. It's what the older son should have done. It's what the Pharisees should be doing with the tax collectors and sinners. The message for the Pharisees is that they are the shepherd and the older brother (I really wish I could figure out the woman and the coin allusion here!) but are failing at their duties. And, of course, the message for the tax collectors and sinners is that they are welcome and God is seeking them even if the so-called leaders aren't!

Again, I love this parable. It's such a masterpiece.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Someone hold my beer

PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO READ THIS. IT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING YOU COULD EVER DO AND IT ONLY TAKES A FEW MINUTES
ARE YOU 100% SURE THAT IF YOU DIED TODAY THAT YOU WOULD GO TO HEAVEN? (CLICK 'READ MORE')

There are some things that you should know:

1. Realize that you are a sinner and in need of a Savior:

Ro 3:23 "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;"

Ro 3:10 "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:"

It all began when the first humans, Adam and Eve were created and God put them in the garden of Eden. God created them perfect to live in fellowship with Him. There was no death or sorrow. God told them not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. They disobeyed God and as a result, sin entered into the world. The pain, which this world sees, is the result of sin.

2. Because of our sins, we die both spiritually and physically, but God sent His Son to die so that you can have a chance not to have to go to hell by accepting what He did on the cross:

Ro 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

Ro 5:8 "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us."

Every person who has ever lived is a sinner and is not righteous because we do bad things. A sin is a crime against God, just as if you steal something at the store, it is punishable by going to jail. It's the same thing with sin. Lying, stealing, sex before marriage, pride, hatred, ect. are all sins. Hell is a prison for those who commit crimes against God. That's because you must be perfect in order to get to heaven. No matter how well you live your life from then on, you have already sinned, which will be punished if you are not pardoned. If you commit a crime, and then live as a good citizen you still will go to jail for the crime you committed. Right? Just as the President can pardon a crime so you won't go to jail, Jesus can pardon your sins so that you do not go to hell, and can go to heaven when you die. You won't have to pay for your own sins because Jesus already did that for you, But if you reject the pardon that He offers, you will have to pay for your own sins by going to hell. He is the only one qualified because He is the only one ever to live a sinless, perfect life.

3. If you will confess Jesus Christ as Your Lord, place your Faith in Him and Believe in your heart that He died, shed His blood and rose again as a sacrifice for your sins, you will be saved (to go to heaven)

Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.

Heb 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

You cannot get to heaven by being a good person, going to church, baptism or any other way other than by turning to Jesus, believing in your heart that He died on the cross and rose from the dead for your sins and placing your Faith in Him. While these are good things to do, some people believe that they will get to heaven, but your Faith must be in Christ and His sacrifice alone and nothing else, giving your life to Him.

Eph 2:8,9 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Ro 10:9,10;13 "that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved...For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."

4. You must submit your life to Jesus Christ and His will in Faith, believing in your heart that He died and rose again shedding His blood to pay for your sins as a sacrifice to God. If you want to accept Jesus free gift of salvation, or if you have any doubts about whether or not you are going to heaven, YOU COULD HUMBLY PRAY SOMETHING LIKE THIS TO GOD FROM YOUR HEART IN FAITH:

"Dear Lord Jesus I know that I am a sinner and need you to save me. I believe that You are the Lord and believe in my heart that You died on the Cross and Rose from the dead, shedding your blood as a Sacrifice for my sins. I turn to You as the only way of Salvation, I submit my life to you, I submit my will to yours, I place my Faith and Trust in You alone as Lord of my life, Please save me and I thank You for it, in Jesus holy name, Amen."

If you have truly placed your faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord, submitting your life to Him, you can know that you are a child of God and on your way to heaven. Now that you are on your way to heaven, you should attend a bible believing church and follow in baptism.

Studying The Bible Is Essential To Christians Growth. Click Here To Walk Through The Bible Verse By Verse From The Beginning, In 25 Minute Lessons:

Through the Bible with Les Feldick

Excellent Genesis-Revelation Bible study, Rightly-Dividing the Word: 82 books and MP3 Audio on-line. Les is an Oklahoma rancher who teaches non-denominational, home-style Bible classes.

www.lesfeldick.org

This reads like a manifesto and not a good one

-I have been slow to post in this thread because I didn't really feel anything I write to you is going to stop you from using the bible as a weapon and that's exactly what you are doing
Let me explain to everyone else since you likely are already going to try and paste some scripture back at me to feel righteous which is pathetic when you are trying to spread the good word, feels more like you are firing into an open crowd at a parade, honestly

-I've been saved twice and I know a couple of truly good Christians that do not preach, do not judge, do not try and twist the bible for their own personal gain
I want to give a big shoutout to Joe Bryant who mailed me a copy of the Case for Christ, i didn't accept Jesus after reading that book but he didn't send it to me as if it was life or death
When the pandemic hit and nobody was allowed to meet up, I found my way to a men's group that was breaking the rules by meeting at a little church rec room
The Ministry of Pain...how do you think I got that title?

Want to discuss the first 1,500 years with the Catholic Church?
Who wrote the Bible? It's rhetorical because only Hebrews could read and write at the time, there were no Christians when they nailed Christ to a cross
Hebrews were being persecuted because they alone seemed to have the path straight to God and an after life...
You really don't think the apostle John wrote his section of the NT do you? Or any of the apostles for that matter

In an era of no internet, newspapers, and a society that was largely illiterate, the modern Christian Church wants us to believe that everything was told person to person before it could be truly written years if not decades later and finally in 323 as i recall, Constantinople finally started Christianity...three hundred and twenty-three years later. It's quite possible much was changed before it could ever be recorded on paper, hence the "inspired word" vs factual

Do your beliefs start with Martin Luther? Do you dismiss everything the Catholic Church did prior to Martin Luther?
Why does Christianity all but dismiss the Old Testament? Lot of loopholes and bad things in there, much easier to simply wash your hands of it like Pontious Pilate did when he ordered the systematic torture and execution of a fairly innocent man who proclaimed he was the Son of God, which actually was a pretty big crime back then.
Jesus wasn't the first to be executed for acting as a prophet

-You're not forwarding the message or the good word, you're setting Christianity back when you post and fling bible scripture at strangers
The way I get someone to open up about Jesus and wanting to accept Christ is by leading them without preaching. I buy a lot of lunches, my mother taught me to feed people
Typically when I am nice to someone or help the lady who is a little short on money at the check out line at the grocery store, it's paid forward to people I will never meet.
Your vibration of love that's how you reach people. To my knowledge "love" is the most discussed topic in the Bible

I don't see much love in the OP, it's as cold and mean as the drunken soldiers that whipped and brutalized Christ before carrying his disfigured body to be nailed and bled out on a cross like a criminal that committed murder. Go ahead and drive those nails thru the wrists and feel good about it.
I hope you take a step back and reflect on what you're doing in here

I''l pray for you in the meantime

 

[Joe Bryant]

huh. seems like you may be forgetting the prodigal son.

Speaking of which. There are two fascinating questions to ask with this story.

1) Who in the story do you most relate with?

• The Father
• The Youngest Son
• The Oldest Son

I confess that I originally understood the oldest son the best and had empathy for his resentment. It took longer to understand the Father, and the youngest son just has never been me. Not to paint with too broad of a brush, but I suspect the "wretched souls that were lost before they were found and were born again" relate best to the youngest son. And I think as a result they are the loudest in their joy (ETA: Luke 7:47 I'm drawing a blank on the gospel story I want to put here in the sense that I know Jesus says something like some have more to be forgiven somewhere) and most wanting to spread that story of salvation. That's fine, especially if that leads to finding the message of taking care of each other to show that gratitude for this gift.

2) Why was the youngest son hungry? (First link I could find.)

• He squandered it all
• There was a famine
• He was hungry and no one offered to help

While I think the answer is "yes" as in all three, I'm inclined to really like the East African answer. And of course I think two of the three are the same - selfishness.

This is such a great, rich parable. I'll go primarily with the Jordanians.

I think this parable is best thought as the ending of a much larger parable. If we read the entire chapter as one parable broken down into 3 (or maybe 4?) sub-parables, we see the primary theme of being lost and found. Being lost is the primary problem and we see the repeated solution is being found.

The first section is the parable of the lost sheep. Here we have a 100 to 1 ratio. The shepherd leaves the 99 to find the 1 and bring him back and there's rejoicing that he's been returned.

The second section is the parable of the lost coin. Here we have a 10 to 1 ratio. The woman searches until she finds the 1 lost coin and there's rejoicing after it's been found.

The third section is the parable of the prodigal son. Here we have a 2 to 1 ratio. The 1 wants to leave the father and the father allows it, giving the son what he thinks he needs in order to live. The 1 finds himself dying of hunger and decides to return to the father. The father is waiting for him to return, has compassion on him when he sees him, and welcomes him back. There's rejoicing that he has returned and is now found.

And then we have another section and what could be called the parable of the older son as we narrow down to a ratio of 1 to 1. The older son is the only one left in the story. The sheep was lost away from the shepherd. The coin was lost inside the woman's house. The younger son was lost away from the father's house. The older son was lost, in a sense, in the father's house.

The chapter starts by telling us the audience is tax collectors, sinners, and Pharisees. The Pharisees are grumbling about how Jesus welcomes these lost tax collectors and sinners. Therefore, Jesus tells parables about the importance of the lost being found. With the lost sheep, he alludes to Ezekiel 34 and how Israel's shepherds failed to seek the lost sheep, so God stepped in and did it himself. Jesus also mirrors a story out of Jewish oral tradition that discusses why Moses was chosen to lead God's people. With the prodigal son, Jesus alludes to Esau and Jacob. Jacob was scared to reunite with Esau. But, as they approached each other, it was Esau (the older brother) who ran to meet Jacob (the younger brother), hugged him, and kissed. In the parable, it is the father, not the older son, who runs, hugs, and kisses the younger son. It's what the older son should have done. It's what the Pharisees should be doing with the tax collectors and sinners. The message for the Pharisees is that they are the shepherd and the older brother (I really wish I could figure out the woman and the coin allusion here!) but are failing at their duties. And, of course, the message for the tax collectors and sinners is that they are welcome and God is seeking them even if the so-called leaders aren't!

Again, I love this parable. It's such a masterpiece.

Agreed. It's one of my favorite stories in the bible.

You've probably read, but for others interested, Tim Keller's Prodigal God is excellent. https://www.amazon.com/Prodigal-God-Recovering-Heart-Christian/dp/1594484023

The New York Times bestselling author of The Prodigal Prophet uncovers the essential message of Jesus, locked inside his most familiar parable.

Newsweek called renowned minister Timothy Keller "a C.S. Lewis for the twenty-first century" in a feature on his first book, The Reason for God. In that book, he offered a rational explanation of why we should believe in God. Now, in The Prodigal God, Keller takes his trademark intellectual approach to understanding Christianity and uses the parable of the prodigal son to reveal an unexpected message of hope and salvation.

Within that parable Jesus reveals God's prodigal grace toward both the irreligious and the moralistic. This book will challenge both the devout and skeptics to see Christianity in a whole new way.

One big takeaway for me was understanding God and the Father in the story as seemingly almost reckless in his love and forgiveness.

 

[Joe Bryant]

That reminds me, if we wanted to revive the idea @BobbyLayne talked about with a FBG Book Club thing, "Reason For God" might be a good one. It's much deeper than something "The Case For Christ" but not so deep it's difficult.

 

[dgreen]

huh. seems like you may be forgetting the prodigal son.

Speaking of which. There are two fascinating questions to ask with this story.

1) Who in the story do you most relate with?

• The Father
• The Youngest Son
• The Oldest Son

I confess that I originally understood the oldest son the best and had empathy for his resentment. It took longer to understand the Father, and the youngest son just has never been me. Not to paint with too broad of a brush, but I suspect the "wretched souls that were lost before they were found and were born again" relate best to the youngest son. And I think as a result they are the loudest in their joy (ETA: Luke 7:47 I'm drawing a blank on the gospel story I want to put here in the sense that I know Jesus says something like some have more to be forgiven somewhere) and most wanting to spread that story of salvation. That's fine, especially if that leads to finding the message of taking care of each other to show that gratitude for this gift.

2) Why was the youngest son hungry? (First link I could find.)

• He squandered it all
• There was a famine
• He was hungry and no one offered to help

While I think the answer is "yes" as in all three, I'm inclined to really like the East African answer. And of course I think two of the three are the same - selfishness.

This is such a great, rich parable. I'll go primarily with the Jordanians.

I think this parable is best thought as the ending of a much larger parable. If we read the entire chapter as one parable broken down into 3 (or maybe 4?) sub-parables, we see the primary theme of being lost and found. Being lost is the primary problem and we see the repeated solution is being found.

The first section is the parable of the lost sheep. Here we have a 100 to 1 ratio. The shepherd leaves the 99 to find the 1 and bring him back and there's rejoicing that he's been returned.

The second section is the parable of the lost coin. Here we have a 10 to 1 ratio. The woman searches until she finds the 1 lost coin and there's rejoicing after it's been found.

The third section is the parable of the prodigal son. Here we have a 2 to 1 ratio. The 1 wants to leave the father and the father allows it, giving the son what he thinks he needs in order to live. The 1 finds himself dying of hunger and decides to return to the father. The father is waiting for him to return, has compassion on him when he sees him, and welcomes him back. There's rejoicing that he has returned and is now found.

And then we have another section and what could be called the parable of the older son as we narrow down to a ratio of 1 to 1. The older son is the only one left in the story. The sheep was lost away from the shepherd. The coin was lost inside the woman's house. The younger son was lost away from the father's house. The older son was lost, in a sense, in the father's house.

The chapter starts by telling us the audience is tax collectors, sinners, and Pharisees. The Pharisees are grumbling about how Jesus welcomes these lost tax collectors and sinners. Therefore, Jesus tells parables about the importance of the lost being found. With the lost sheep, he alludes to Ezekiel 34 and how Israel's shepherds failed to seek the lost sheep, so God stepped in and did it himself. Jesus also mirrors a story out of Jewish oral tradition that discusses why Moses was chosen to lead God's people. With the prodigal son, Jesus alludes to Esau and Jacob. Jacob was scared to reunite with Esau. But, as they approached each other, it was Esau (the older brother) who ran to meet Jacob (the younger brother), hugged him, and kissed. In the parable, it is the father, not the older son, who runs, hugs, and kisses the younger son. It's what the older son should have done. It's what the Pharisees should be doing with the tax collectors and sinners. The message for the Pharisees is that they are the shepherd and the older brother (I really wish I could figure out the woman and the coin allusion here!) but are failing at their duties. And, of course, the message for the tax collectors and sinners is that they are welcome and God is seeking them even if the so-called leaders aren't!

Again, I love this parable. It's such a masterpiece.

Agreed. It's one of my favorite stories in the bible.

You've probably read, but for others interested, Tim Keller's Prodigal God is excellent. https://www.amazon.com/Prodigal-God-Recovering-Heart-Christian/dp/1594484023

The New York Times bestselling author of The Prodigal Prophet uncovers the essential message of Jesus, locked inside his most familiar parable.

Newsweek called renowned minister Timothy Keller "a C.S. Lewis for the twenty-first century" in a feature on his first book, The Reason for God. In that book, he offered a rational explanation of why we should believe in God. Now, in The Prodigal God, Keller takes his trademark intellectual approach to understanding Christianity and uses the parable of the prodigal son to reveal an unexpected message of hope and salvation.

Within that parable Jesus reveals God's prodigal grace toward both the irreligious and the moralistic. This book will challenge both the devout and skeptics to see Christianity in a whole new way.

One big takeaway for me was understanding God and the Father in the story as seemingly almost reckless in his love and forgiveness.

I actually haven't read Keller yet. I got into reading just a few years ago, so I have quite the backlog and my interests keep taking me in various directions! Keller comes highly recommended, though, so I plan on getting to him at some point.

So, I'm not sure if Keller points this out, but I heard someone else mention the younger son's words "Father, I have sinned against Heaven and before you" is an echo of Pharoah's "I have sinned against the LORD your God and against you." It was suggested that maybe Jesus put those words in the mouth of the younger son because he wants to draw a parallel to Pharaoh. That maybe it's not a "real" repentance, whatever we might mean by that, yet the Father still welcomed him back! Your comment on the reckless love and forgiveness reminded me of that potential link. For an excellent book on the Exodus that discusses the topic of how God wanted to save Pharaoh too, I suggest The Exodus You Almost Passed Over by Rabbi David Fohrman. Probably the best book I've read.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Yeah, Keller is fantastic.

Sorry for not circling back to this. I've been battling Covid for 12 days, and also am a lot busier now because I returned to work a few months ago.

But maybe in January 2025 we could do a book Zoom thing using "The Reason for God"

$8.49 on Amazon if anyone wants to pick it up.

 

[Paddington]

With all of that said, the only people who will go to hell are those who fail to accept the Pardon that God has already provided for us through Faith in Jesus Christ

Faith is not a choice; it is a gift.

Ephesians 2:8-9 (even in the King James Version)​

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

That is not what this verse is sayin. Salvation is the gift of God. Faith is a choice to believe God when He reveals it to us. I do agree that a man must be drawn to God by the Holy Spirit, but you are misinterpreting this passage. Salvation is the topic, therefore, Salvation is the gift of God. Grace is something that God does for you that you cannot do for yourself. That is the gift of God. Faith is our choice to believe God. We gain access to God's Grace through our choice of Faith (Believing and Trusting God)

Romans 5:2 (KJV)​

by whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

Ephesians 3:12 (KJV)​

in whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him.

Faith is a gift from God is not exactly a novel idea that I dreamt up. Nor is it exclusive to a single passage.

2 Peter 1:1
to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ

Philippians 1:29
For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;

Acts 3:16
... the faith which is by him ...

Faith is a choice we make to believe and trust in the Lord. Faith is how we obtain the Grace of God. Grace is when God does something for you that you cannot do for yourself.

Joshua 24:15
And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

Deuteronomy 30:19
I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

 

[dkp993]

Grace is when God does something for you that you cannot do for yourself.

Like send you to hell for eternity if you don’t have faith. Quite graceful.

 

[Paddington]

Grace is when God does something for you that you cannot do for yourself.

Like send you to hell for eternity if you don’t have faith. Quite graceful.

That's the one thing God requires of us all. How can God trust you with anything if you don't trust Him?

Hebrews 11:6 KJV
[6] But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Enmity=Enemy Carnal=Fleshly, Natural, Non Spiritual


Romans 8:7
Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

You know I can understand how among a community of believers the certain stylistic flair of the King James Version of the bible can be appealing. But if one's goal is to meet people where they are and spread the good news I cannot imagine how that this text is helpful for more than a tiny subset of people. Seems like more of expecting people to come to you then the other way around.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

You know I can understand how among a community of believers the certain stylistic flair of the King James Version of the bible can be appealing. But if one's goal is to meet people where they are and spread the good news I cannot imagine how that this text is helpful for more than a tiny subset of people. Seems like more of expecting people to come to you then the other way around.

Agreed. I like the KJV in small doses, but it's not the version that I'm going to pull off the shelf if I'm reading a passage seriously. People should just pick whatever translation they're most comfortable with. If they want a paraphrase like The Message, fine. I hate that personally, but whatever works for you.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

You know I can understand how among a community of believers the certain stylistic flair of the King James Version of the bible can be appealing. But if one's goal is to meet people where they are and spread the good news I cannot imagine how that this text is helpful for more than a tiny subset of people. Seems like more of expecting people to come to you then the other way around.

 

[Paddington]

You know I can understand how among a community of believers the certain stylistic flair of the King James Version of the bible can be appealing. But if one's goal is to meet people where they are and spread the good news I cannot imagine how that this text is helpful for more than a tiny subset of people. Seems like more of expecting people to come to you then the other way around.

Agreed. I like the KJV in small doses, but it's not the version that I'm going to pull off the shelf if I'm reading a passage seriously. People should just pick whatever translation they're most comfortable with. If they want a paraphrase like The Message, fine. I hate that personally, but whatever works for you.

It important that the translation doesn't leave out important words that change doctrines and some do. Personally, I don't like the paraphrase versions because they and change the meaning of passages to make them mean what they want them to rather than what it actually says.

 

[Wildcat]

That reminds me, if we wanted to revive the idea @BobbyLayne talked about with a FBG Book Club thing, "Reason For God" might be a good one. It's much deeper than something "The Case For Christ" but not so deep it's difficult.

I will check it out. I've "read" (listened to) The Case for Christ and enjoyed it. Have you or anyone else read books by Stephen C. Meyer? They keep popping up in my suggested reads, Reading the summaries, he seems centered around proving the case for intelligent design.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

It important that the translation doesn't leave out important words that change doctrines and some do. Personally, I don't like the paraphrase versions because they and change the meaning of passages to make them mean what they want them to rather than what it actually says.

Debating* scripture among believers, this may be true. But even then the KJV is using more modern (for the time translations) then most other common versions which are using text, that at least by age is closer to the original.

But this is irrelevant to my point. My point is that if you want to engage with someone that isn't a believer at all,believes something else entirely, or is weak in faith, or believes but lives life as if they didn't; then you need to go to them and their level. Spouting off beautiful, but hard to comprehend the language yet alone the message scripture is asking them to come to you. That is backwards. Let's say that you are correct in the superiority of the KJV such that a paraphrased version only provides 80% of the message or a more modern translation only offers 95% of the message while the KJV is 100%. If the person that the message is being shared with 100% grasps the paraphrased or modern translation but only grasps half of the KJV then the KJV is the wrong choice. And I think I'm being generous with half.

*I know that 1 Timothy (I think) says we shouldn't quarrel about scripture or something close to that. But I think the meaning of that has been lost. I mean if we weren't suppose to debate why are their two different versions of lots of the Old Testament and four different versions of the Gospels which all contradict each other in the (to me) trivial details that one might quibble over. Maybe it was an attempt to distinguish Christians from Jews where it is a common saying that "debate is a sacrement", but I think that even 1 Timothy is engaged is just such a debate, or maybe how Timothy should engage in such ongoing debates.