Personal interpretation of Scripture and Authority of Church

[Cachonga]

Sorry for not responding in a while. It seems that BibleAnswer has all but taken over this thread, and I have no interest in “debating” him. I would like to briefly respond to post #175 and then exit this thread.

po18guy:

A parable: There were two forum users who were on separate missions to lecture that billion or so ignorant Catholics on what the truth is. One cannot say what he is, only what he isn’t. The other apparently worships the bible. Both disagree with one another on bible doctrine, but do they argue amongst them selves? No. Both intuitively know that the Catholic Church is the enemy. This is because it teaches differently from them - never mind that they teach differently from one another. Neither reveals any particular denial of self, or obedience to anything but their own opinion of a book. But, since neither has plucked an eye out, or cut a hand off when it offended them, neither appears to follow that book, either. Both spout private interpretation after private interpretation, conveniently ignoring the fact that the very same bible prohibits exactly what they are doing. Briefly pausing from his unending task of roaming the earth, the evil one is smiling. His demons have done their work well. Two more souls lead astray.

Seems like po18guy (and probably some others) think that I will not debate BibleAnswer because, even though we disagree with each other, we “intuitively know that the Catholic Church is the enemy”. However, if you look back, you will see where I have attempted to engage him on some different points, and have concluded (and advised everyone) that BibleAnswer appears to follow the heretical teachings of Harold Camping. He also appears to believe in King James Only, which adds to the problem of interacting with him (I’m not sure if the KJV Only is characteristic of followers of Harold Camping, but somehow it wouldn’t surprise me). As anyone knows who has tried to discuss Scriptures with someone who believes in KJV Only, their attitude is “If you’re not using the KJV, then you’re not using Scriptures”, or “If you don’t agree with my interpretation, you need to study more.” This last attitude seems to fit in with the Camping heresy (certainly BibleAnswer has made this position crystal clear). Why should I (or any Christian) cast my pearls before this swine?

I should also point out that I have made it clear that I do not believe myself (or anyone else) to be infallible. I encourage everyone not to take my word for anything, but check what I say against Scripture (just like the Bereans did with Paul). I do believe Christians should be in a Bible-believing Church, under the authority of a godly pastor. Sola Scriptura does not deny the authority of the Church to teach, but it does hold the ministers accountable to the Scriptures.

Pax!

 

[BibleAnswer]

***having never being able to find where in the Bible permission, a mandate or simply a right to self interpation exist. [Please feel free to enlighten me furhter on this topic.] I take note of the fact this bit of evidence seems to beg a question. “Is self interpetation of the Bible a good idea?”

No, THEE Church does not “save” rather Her function is to guide, lead and assist others to do all that is necessary for one’s personal salvation.

Only God saves, and it is a free gift. But like some other gifts, it has strings attached, which is the perogative of the giver of all Good gifts.

Time and again we have explained the Catholic position is that no one by works alone can earn heaven. It is as God Himself mandates Faith as evidenced THROUGH works, that is Faith and Works that hold the potential of personal salvation.***

If this is the case, then doesn’t it seem hypocrital to advertise a plan for salvation, if by definition, a plan, is work.

And faith and believing are the same exact word, one is a verb, one is a noun. both of those words also, require work. So how do you reconcile that if faith and believeing is a work, and work can not get you saved, then what can a person do to gaurantee salvation?

I think this is a good question for us, as it is pretty basic, and we will see all the different ideas about what it means. Though I keep to the claim, that the bible only gives one answer. Lets see what happens.

 

[elvisman]

If this is the case, then doesn’t it seem hypocrital to advertise a plan for salvation, if by definition, a plan, is work.

And faith and believing are the same exact word, one is a verb, one is a noun. both of those words also, require work. So how do you reconcile that if faith and believeing is a work, and work can not get you saved, then what can a person do to gaurantee salvation?

I think this is a good question for us, as it is pretty basic, and we will see all the different ideas about what it means. Though I keep to the claim, that the bible only gives one answer. Lets see what happens.

Wrong.
Actually, faith and believing are NOT the same thing.
Believing is acknowledging something as true.
Faith is trust, loyalty and obedience to that belief.

James 2:19 tells us that even the demons believe that God is one - though, I think you would agree that they have no trust, loyalty or obedience to God.

 

[BibleAnswer]

Wrong.
Actually, faith and believing are NOT the same thing.
**Believing **is acknowledging something as true.
**Faith **is trust, loyalty and obedience to that belief.

James 2:19 tells us that even the demons believe that God is one - though, I think you would agree that they have no trust, loyalty or obedience to God.

Wow, okay.

First, Faith and Beilif is the same. I am sorry you dont recognize that. One is a verb, one is a noun. Both of these words, require work on the part of a person, And how can we acknowledge the LORD as being true if we have never seen or heard Him in person. This is a fallicy to think that YOU have faith and that YOU believe. in Actuallity, we are all incabable of coming to the LORD on His terms, and it is the faith of the LORD in us, that allows us to really believe. Even this screams of the fact that, we have absolutely no control. We can only be exposed to the word and hope that the Lord has drawn us. If you can’t recognize that, then how can you think you understand even the basic of principals.

Second, the demon in that man at the tomb, who the Lord cast into the herd of swine, as well as the myriad of other people possesed, that approached the LORD and said “what have I to do with you LORD, did you come to torment me.” This shows that even the evil recognized the authority of the LORD. SEnse the LORD is the Lamb slain before the foundations, and before the foundation there was principalites and powers, including the now cast out evil spirits, they all recognized the LORD because they had witnessed HIm before. They however elevated themselvs to the stature of the LORD, thus they were cast down. they have faith and beileif both, haveing recognized the LORDs authority, However they are not made in the image of God, so they have no salvation, only destruction at the end of time. this is why they approached Him, because the battle with Satan and the Lord happened before the foundatinos. the LORD prevailed seeing how He was slain and resurected. they acted such because they new also that having lost the battle, that they were doomed to destrction at the end of time. they asked Him if it was the alloted time for destruction, thus they kneeled on knees to Him and worshiped Him. Even the evil spirites,in everyone of those stories, bowed to Him and worshiped.

 

[EdOsiecki]

Is the infallible Magisterium of the Catholic church who alone have the authority to properly interpret Scriptures, are they correct in their interpretation of Gen 3:15 that the woman mentioned there is Mary who will crush the head of the serpent?

 

[BibleAnswer]

Is the infallible Magisterium of the Catholic church who alone have the authority to properly interpret Scriptures, are they correct in their interpretation of Gen 3:15 that the woman mentioned there is Mary who will crush the head of the serpent?

Genesis
12And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. 13And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. 14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

15And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Honestly, I cant comment difinitively on this, though my initial study of this reveals,

Enmity means a mutual hatred and ill will
To clutch or bruise the heel, means deception.

context of the heel comment:

Gen 25:26 Afterward his brother came out, and his hand took hold of Esau’s heel; so his name was called Jacob. Isaac was sixty years old when she [Rebekah] bore them.

Jacob means to decieve. To clutch the heel, means to decieve.

So already this is my initial connection. The serpent decieves Eve, or more generically, MAN, we can all recognize this, and they are at enmity. Satan was always the serpent, And Satan has an intense hatred of God and anything in His image, namely humans.

Jacob in Gen 25:26 litterall clutched Esaus heal, and was litterally called Jacob for this fact, which means to decieve.

so the context to me, of the statement in Gen 3:15, is pointing to a spiritual truth about the nature of Satan. That he Hates anything made in Gods image, out of jelousy, because Satan elevated himself to the Lords stature, and that He will always devieve Man.

The “thy will crush his head” would be pointing MANS seed crushing the head of the serpent, but what is the spiritual meaning of that, i dont know yet.

The “thou shall bruise its heel” is refering to the serpane bruising the heel of MANS seed. Which if this is a connection, would mean to decieve.

I dont see a conection with Mary the mother of God just yet. I need to really study this before i can say without a doubt that this means this and that means that.

thank you for giving me tonights study though. I am interested to understand this.

what do you think?

 

[Peter_Dawson]

Genesis
12And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. 13And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. 14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

15And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Honestly, I cant comment difinitively on this, though my initial study of this reveals,

Enmity means a mutual hatred and ill will
To clutch or bruise the heel, means deception.

context of the heel comment:

Gen 25:26 Afterward his brother came out, and his hand took hold of Esau’s heel; so his name was called Jacob. Isaac was sixty years old when she [Rebekah] bore them.

Jacob means to decieve. To clutch the heel, means to decieve.

So already this is my initial connection. The serpent decieves Eve, or more generically, MAN, we can all recognize this, and they are at enmity. Satan was always the serpent, And Satan has an intense hatred of God and anything in His image, namely humans.

Jacob in Gen 25:26 litterall clutched Esaus heal, and was litterally called Jacob for this fact, which means to decieve.

so the context to me, of the statement in Gen 3:15, is pointing to a spiritual truth about the nature of Satan. That he Hates anything made in Gods image, out of jelousy, because Satan elevated himself to the Lords stature, and that He will always devieve Man.

The “thy will crush his head” would be pointing MANS seed crushing the head of the serpent, but what is the spiritual meaning of that, i dont know yet.

The “thou shall bruise its heel” is refering to the serpane bruising the heel of MANS seed. Which if this is a connection, would mean to decieve.

I dont see a conection with Mary the mother of God just yet. I need to really study this before i can say without a doubt that this means this and that means that.

thank you for giving me tonights study though. I am interested to understand this.

what do you think?

Hi, Ed. It’s simple: The seed of the woman would crush Satan’s head when the cross pierces the ground at “Skull Place,” get it?

The seed of Satan bruises His heel when the nail is driven through Christ’s feet on the cross.

 

[BibleAnswer]

ahh, i actually do have some insight,
ha it staring me in the face, i wasn’t looking at the whole spiritual picture.

Seed, as defined by the bible, would be all the tru believers. Abrahams seed is different than the offspring of Abraham. Abraham would be the father of that seed, the body of true believers. Isaac was the father of that seed. Jacob was the father of that seed. His name becoms Israel, a whole entire nation.

So remember spiritually speaking, seed is refering to a true believer. This is different from haveing a baby, that baby might not be a seed, meaning a true believer. this is spiritual language.

So in Gen3:15 when it is talking about enmity between seeds, meaning A mutal hatred between the two. A mutual hatred from evil unto good. And a natural hatred of Good unto evil. Thus, a natural enmity.

We have establsihed that to bruise a heel, to clutch a heel, is spiritual language for deciet.

So break it down so it fits the message of the entire bible.

Satan will be battling and decieving the true children of God forever more because he hates all things God. Man is made in Gods image. the true children of God, the elect, the saved, would be the seed of God. So just like the devil[serpent] hated Adam and Eve, and wanted nothing more than to disrupt Gods plan, thus the decieving lie to eat the fruit. this is saying that this will always always be the case.

I cant rectify what it means about thou seed, or satans seed. I suppose this could mean, the true evil of the unbeliever, will always be at odds with the true goodness of a believer. Which we know this to be true. a constant battle and struggle. This makes much more sense, and fits the theme and scope of the bible, as opposed to saying Mary will crush the head of the serpent, which is out of context, and not true, as we read in rev. The beast with seven heads. One of the heads is badly wounded, this language says it was a death blow [to satan], and it was healed. Meaning at one point Satn was dealt a death blow, was taken down, out of the picture, and now the head is scabbed and crusted over, yet healed. meaning now satan is again at work in the world.

I believe, that the only person capable of dealing a death blow to satan, would be God, or Christ, not Mary,

 

[PJM]

=BibleAnswer -If this is the case, then doesn’t it seem hypocrital to advertise a plan for salvation, if by definition, a plan, is work.

---

I don’t recall the term “plan” in any of my post. all though if it is in reference to God’s plan, what God requires and expects, the word might find some application.***

And faith and believing are the same exact word, one is a verb, one is a noun. both of those words also, require work. So how do you reconcile that if faith and believeing is a work, and work can not get you saved, then what can a person do to gaurantee salvation?{/QUOTE]

Permit me to disagree. Faith is acceptance of the unknown, often with facts unproveable. Beleiving is acceptance of that which can be known.

I think this is a good question for us, as it is pretty basic, and we will see all the different ideas about what it means. Though I keep to the claim, that the bible only gives one answer.

Lets see what happens.

Perhaps friend this is because in TRUTH ONLY ONE answer can and does exist.

 

[EdOsiecki]

Hi, Ed. It’s simple: The seed of the woman would crush Satan’s head when the cross pierces the ground at “Skull Place,” get it?

The seed of Satan bruises His heel when the nail is driven through Christ’s feet on the cross.

Thanks for your reply. My reason for asking, I have several Bible versions including the New American Catholic , the NIV, The living Bible and they all refer to the “it shall crush satan’s head” as “He (Jesus) shall crush satan’s head”. But in the “Our Sunday’s Visitor’s Catholic Encyclopedia” page 646 in reference to the St Catherine’s medal it states, " On the front side of the medal may be seen the Blessed Mother standing on the globe of the earth and crushing the head of the evil serpent, Satan" It then goes on to say on the other side of that medal, " woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and on her head a crown of twelve stars(ef. Rv 12:1)" is refering to Mary. But the woman in Rev 12 is not Mary, it’s about Israel and the woman in Gen 3:15 doesn’t crush satan’s head, Jesus does. My question, " How can the Catholic church claim infallible authority aren’t they are wrong in both cases?" ED O.

 

[holy_moly]

As I stated in the other thread, “I would suggest that any church which teaches mans traditions in place of God’s Word has abandoned any God-given authority to teach. Look at the warnings to the 7 Churches in Revelations for an example.” I assert the Catholic Church teaches man made traditions (ie-perpetual virginity, immaculate conception, and bodily assumption (all concerning Mary), just to name a few), and, therefore, has abandoned the authority to teach God’s word.

On the othr hand, where in the Bible (if you adhere to sola scriptura), does it say these things did NOT occur, either literally or by implication

 

[Ginger2]

…several Bible versions including the New American Catholic , the NIV, The living Bible and they all refer to the “it shall crush satan’s head” as “He (Jesus) shall crush satan’s head”…

I studied this awhile back and the word “it” in the Hebrew text is a scribal error

The word “she”, also stems from an error in translating:
(As I mentioned earlier, this is one of the errors found significant enough for two popes to complete the task of correcting errors in the Catholic Bible)
**
The RC admits the original text says “he”, not “she”.**

NEW ADVENT Catholic Encyclopedia:
(2) The second point of difference between the Hebrew text and our version concerns the agent who is to inflict the mortal wound on the serpent: our version agrees with the present Vulgate text in reading “she” (ipsa) which refers to the woman, while the Hebrew text reads hu’ (autos, ipse) which refers to the seed ** (Jesus) of the woman.**

The RC explains that by using “she” the passage makes clear Jesus is the one who really crushes satan’s head. :ehh:

**According to our version, … the woman herself will win the victory; …The reading “she” (ipsa) is neither an intentional corruption of the original text, nor is it an accidental error; it is rather an explanatory version expressing explicitly the fact of Our Lady’s part in the victory over the serpent, … **

Let’s see if that makes sense…

She gave birth to a son. He was named Jesus.
She gave birth to a son. She was named Jesus.

Who was named Jesus? Was she named Jesus or was he named Jesus.

Here’s another example:
The son ate lunch with his mother. He paid the check.
The son ate lunch with his mother. She paid the check.

Does this last sentence make clear to the reader that the son is the one who paid the check?

BTW, Protestant Bibles contain the verse as originally written, “he shall crush”

Now, back to moving…

 

[greggy53]

I studied this awhile back and the word “it” in the Hebrew text is a scribal error

The word “she”, also stems from an error in translating:
(As I mentioned earlier, this is one of the errors found significant enough for two popes to complete the task of correcting errors in the Catholic Bible)
**
The RC admits the original text says “he”, not “she”.**

NEW ADVENT Catholic Encyclopedia:
(2) The second point of difference between the Hebrew text and our version concerns the agent who is to inflict the mortal wound on the serpent: our version agrees with the present Vulgate text in reading “she” (ipsa) which refers to the woman, while the Hebrew text reads hu’ (autos, ipse) which refers to the seed ** (Jesus) of the woman.**

The RC explains that by using “she” the passage makes clear Jesus is the one who really crushes satan’s head. :ehh:

**According to our version, … the woman herself will win the victory; …The reading “she” (ipsa) is neither an intentional corruption of the original text, nor is it an accidental error; it is rather an explanatory version expressing explicitly the fact of Our Lady’s part in the victory over the serpent, … **

Let’s see if that makes sense…

She gave birth to a son. He was named Jesus.
She gave birth to a son. She was named Jesus.

Who was named Jesus? Was she named Jesus or was he named Jesus.

Here’s another example:
The son ate lunch with his mother. He paid the check.
The son ate lunch with his mother. She paid the check.

Does this last sentence make clear to the reader that the son is the one who paid the check?

BTW, Protestant Bibles contain the verse as originally written, “he shall crush”

Now, back to moving…

New Advent says this: “ I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.” She shall crush… Ipsa, the woman; so divers of the fathers read this place, conformably to the Latin: others read it ipsum, viz., the seed. The sense is the same: for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent’s head.

Prod Bibles changed the she to He…This is from the original Vulgate the "1st edition of the Bible.
Nothing complicated about it. With all the deceit, and babbling its no wonder you Protestants are so confused.

 

[PJM]

=BibleAnswer;Wow, okay. :shrugJM]

First, Faith and Beilef is the same. I am sorry you dont recognize that. One is a verb, one is a noun. Both of these words, require work on the part of a person, And how can we acknowledge the LORD as being true if we have never seen or heard Him in person?
This is a fallicy to think that YOU have faith and that YOU believe. in Actuallity, we are all incabable of coming to the LORD on His terms, [Mt.5:48 “You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” So why did Christ tell us to? pjm [/COLOR]and it is the faith of the LORD in us, that allows us to really believe. Even this screams of the fact that, we have absolutely no control. We can only be exposed to the word and hope that the Lord has drawn us. If you can’t recognize that, then how can you think you understand even the basic of principals.

Second, the demon in that man at the tomb, who the Lord cast into the herd of swine, as well as the myriad of other people possesed, that approached the LORD and said “what have I to do with you LORD, did you come to torment me.” This shows that even the evil recognized the authority of the LORD. Sense the LORD is the Lamb slain before the foundations, [and also at the Last Supper. 1 Cor. 11:23-26] and before the foundation there was principalites and powers, including the now cast out evil spirits, they all recognized the LORD because they had witnessed HIm before.? pjm] They however elevated themselvs to the stature of the LORD, thus they were cast down. they have faith and beileif both, haveing recognized the LORDs authority, However they are not made in the image of God, so they have no salvation, only destruction at the end of time

.

Opps: You’re position is anti-biblical. Gen. 1: 26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, [does not say some, rather ALL] after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.” So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. 28 And God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”

***Rom. 8: 28 "We know that in everything God works for good with those who love him, who are called according to his purpose. 29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the first-born among many brethren. And those whom he predestined he also called; and those whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also glorified. ***

***Mt. Henrey’s expresses well Portestant theology on the issue of predestination, saying that it is a factual and litteral translation of what takes place.

The Catholic position is that personal salvation requires both Faith and works, true repentance and Confession, as well as Baptism.***

The often expressed and widely held position of non-Catholics on this issue shows an amazing lack of understanding of the very,and very much essential, and all to geather necessary Nature of God which can be expressed as "God is and must be all good perfectly."

One then asks if necessary elements of “goodness” must include being fair and just? Obviously the answer is that indeed this is true.

Predestination presupposes salvation soley on the basis of “faith alone.” But ignores the very words of Christ in say, Jn.3:5; 3:36 and Mt. 19:16, as well as Jn.20:21-23, and 1 Jn. 5:16-18. which explain 1 Jn. 1:8 “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.”

An example: You steal $5.00 from me, when I insist that you return it, you refuse and in anger I kill you. I am killed in my attempted esacpe.

So we both die with unrepented and unconfessed sin. Can, Will God judge us in the same manner, ignoring the degree of wrong done by each of us? 2 Tim. 4:“1I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom:… 3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths.” In Divine [perfected] fairness and justice, God obviously cannot do so.

this is why they approached Him, because the battle with Satan and the Lord happened before the foundatinos.What? So it is NOT ungoing today? Over a MILLION abortions annually is the USA and there is no batttle for souls:shrug: pjm

the LORD prevailed seeing how He was slain and resurected. they acted such because they new also that having lost the battle, that they were doomed to destrction at the end of time. they asked Him if it was the alloted time for destruction, thus they kneeled on knees to Him and worshiped Him.

I know I’m not quite understanding what you are saying. Please clarify.

 

[BibleAnswer]

Ginger2:
Ginger, you surprise me my friend,

Luke 16 is called the parable of the unjust servant. This story is explicitly stated as being a parable, Second, The study i did fits the whole theme of the bible. Third, any statement you find concerning hell, would never ever ever support your claim for an actual hell… Any statement you find, like you said, must fit the entire message of the bible. And once you actauly sit down and break the verse down, then you would see that you could never be justified into thinking there was an actual hell.

Ginger i think you have a firm understanding, yet you can fall in the trap like the everybody else, Pride. You never looked at Luke 16, otherwise you would not have wasted you time explaining the difference between parable and real events, you would have know that this was a parable.

Finally, nothing i said is opinion. I broke the parable down, and discovered that the word for torment and tormenting, is associated with sorrow, and sorrowing.

This is called comparing scripture with scripture:

Is 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, here a little, there a little.

I give an opportunity to learn, yet everybody is so prideful they refuse to hear with spiritual ears.

To learn that when God is speaking of Torment, or torment and gnashing of teeth, He is talking about Sorrow, about sorrow and voicing contempt. Which is what gnashing of teeth would be, to rebuke and cry out your sorrow at being witness to Gods Judgment, In every single verse that statement is made, weeping and gnashing of teeth, of everlasting torment.

Rest assured that this means, to be under Gods wrath, which is sorrow, which is weeping, which is crying out against God, gnashing your teeth. This has nothing to do with physical pain, or physical fire, or physical hell.

But nobody wished to be interested in this information. Which shows me that nobody has in intenst desire to study and know the word of God. To bad, what does it say if you don’t have an intenst desire to study and know the word of God, rather, to proclaim in these forums that you have the answers to everything i say. When i have spent close to 8 months of constant hourly study, and what have the rest of you done, even cracked the bible open today, yesterday, studied a certain passage many many times. I doubt it. So how can you presume to argue sound doctrine. So what is the goal of this forum.

To tell me that Luke 16 is not a parable and that my ideas are going against God.

Whoa to you then, all of your relatives whom you love, who didn’t become saved, rest assured you can be comforted in the fact that they are know suffereing forever and eternally being burned and tormented by Satan, and that they will never never never know grace or renewal again. Sorry Grandma Helen, Sorry uncle rick, you just gotta burn forever with never a cool drop on your tongue.

haha. laughable. that does not show the mercy of God. On the other hand,

Its ok timmy, grandma is dead,. “but is she in heaven she didn’t believe in God, what does God do with her.” Well grandma is dead, she lived her life, she enjoyed it, now she is just dead, she isn’t suffering, she isn’t in pain, she ceases to be,"

Wow, that sounds much more merciful to me.

All throughout the bible teaches that 39 plus 1 stripe is the most anyman can take for punishment, 40 stripes, 39 -1 stripes, basically 40 stripes is the max,.

41 is abuse.

Even when they scourged Jesus, they made careful not to whip Him more than 40 stripes, they made sure because it was a law set in stone by God. God is merciful and He knows that more than 40 stripes is evil and abuse.

Take this into consideration when deciding if Hell is real, which it isn’t, or rather, it is the state of being in a grave, in a pit, in death.

God would not punish us forever more, this goes against the law of 40 stripes. Which all this means, is that there is a limit. A limit to Gods punishment. that is lesson one

Lesson two, there is an end of time, and there is an end to hell. which is death. we read in revelations, that hell and death will be thrown into the lake of fire, which is the second death. the final death.

Satan, and all of his minions, and hell[being dead] and death will be thrown into the lake of fire for the final consumation.

This means, that after God destroys the world full of sin, that there will never be any sin again, that even death will never come into existence again, that all of this will be burned away, along with all the chaff, the tares, and a new heaven and a new earth.

remember, that death is a penalty for adam and eve for unbelieving. That original sin follows us to this day. So when hell and death are thrown into the fire, this means that death and hell, which is spiritual death, complete death, death of the sin cursed man, will no longer be.

this is Gods promise. I believe in the bible. I believe every single word to be true, includeing the end of the world. If you dont, then you are a hypocryte because you cant choose to believe one thing and not the other thing it says.

 

[LionHeart777]

BibleAnswer,

if you have called me a hypocrite because I don’t believe the Bible than that is not accurate. If I am a hypocrite because I don’t believe your interpretation of the Bible when it appears to conflict with the early Church fathers and 2,000 years of continuous teaching by the successors of Apostles in the Apostolic Churches (someone correct me if I’m mistaken), well than I guess I am guilty (see your above post) .

I would be unwise if I did not hold you in suspicion.

 

[BibleAnswer]

BibleAnswer,

if you have called me a hypocrite because I don’t believe the Bible than that is not accurate. If I am a hypocrite because I don’t believe your interpretation of the Bible when it appears to conflict with the early Church fathers and 2,000 years of history that has been consistently taught by the successors of the Apostles in the Apostolic Churches (someone correct me if I’m mistaken), well than I guess I am guilty (see your above post) .

Well, i can’t honestly say I am debating the 2000 years of knowledge we have. I have a great respect for all of those men, the church that started it, and the knowledge we have learned from it.

I absolutely apologize for giving the impression. I mean who am I. I know I know.

No, let me just clarify, For this particular comment, I was referring to the course of time,

I believe that just like God created the world exactly as it says in Gen, and that the LORD was crucified and resurrected, and that He ascended to heaven and sent the Holy spirit, and that “at” the end of time, the same LORD, will appear in a like manner, descending from the sky on clouds of glory and fulfill every single prophesy spoken about in Isiah, Jerahmiah, Daniel, Mark, Matthew, Timothy, 2 Thess, Rev. etc I believe that with the same furver as everything else. I don’t think any of it, any book, and verse, any word or letter, should be taken so lightly. Thats all.

Finally, I respect everybodies opinion, I should not be sounding like a jerk on here.

though it is TRULY DISHEARTENING to see how little people grasp the bible. Even if you go to church, you would think you would be asking enough question to have a better grasp and learn from them seeing how everybody believes that is the only way to learn.

But people love to argue and prove a point and they are going off of feeling and a general understanding of the bible that we were all taught. Just like me I was taught the same information.

But then I learned that torment and tormenting, are metaphors for sorrow and sorrowing. That hell is not a **place **with caves and fires and brimstone and the Devil inflicting never ending pain, but is to be under Gods Wrath. All of the statement about death of the unsaved, have to do with being under Gods wrath. Then I learned that being under Gods wrath is the state of being separated from God. To be under Gods wrath is always described as an eternal fire, the eternal fire of Gods judgment means total destruction, total destruction means to never come into existence again. To never come into existence again, is to be dead, body and soul. To be dead body and soul means that you are forever under Gods wrath and will never again come to know His Grace or Glory again, you are forever separated and shamed. The worm dieth not, means that the shame is eternal. eternal shame is to be eternally cut off from God. To be eternally cut off from God, means that you suffer Gods judgment. Gods judgment is Gods wrath. Gods wrath is a everlasting fire, Gods everlasting fire means total annihilation. The dead do not feel pain. our soul, does not feel pain, our physical bodies feel pain. When we die, our body corrupts in the ground, and if we are unsaved, if we did not become reborn after our initial birth into sin, then our soul is dead also, our soul is not reborn, it is dead,. thats it.

If we are reborn, then after our physical body is dead and rotting, and our soul goes up into heaven to be with God, then our salvation still is not complete, because we were promised a brand new resurrected body, just like our brand new resurrected soul. If you dont believe in the end of time, or that it is hyperbole or whatever, then you would not understand that in order for us to receive a new resurrected body, the end of time must come first and Christ must come back. If he never came back we would not receive our new resurrected body, and our salvation would never never ever be complete.

 

[BibleAnswer]

BibleAnswer,

if you have called me a hypocrite because I don’t believe the Bible than that is not accurate. If I am a hypocrite because I don’t believe your interpretation of the Bible when it appears to conflict with the early Church fathers and 2,000 years of continuous teaching by the successors of Apostles in the Apostolic Churches (someone correct me if I’m mistaken), well than I guess I am guilty (see your above post) .

I would be unwise if I did not hold you in suspicion.

Also, Nick was it… its been a few days, I feel like we are all almost friends…

Anyway, yes that is a wise thing to say, that it would be unwise if you did not hold suspicion. That is all well and good, however that problem arises, when you don’t go and check out the presented information. I have never said take my word, I only presented the argument, and my work on certain topics, like rich man and Lazarus. And the only response is why I am so full of it.

Thats fine, but lets say I am correct, just for the sake of argument, lets say that I kindly presented my work on the rich man and Lazarus, which i did. and i proved a truth that has been misinterpreted before. and I did this using the method I have only ever preached, to compare scripture with scripture, and to apply the knowledge to the parable, which i showed all my work. Now, lets say that i accurately interpreted this, and proved that the word “torment”, God is talking about, always, in every single case, is talking about “sorrow” I just proved that, for the sake of argument though remember, now seeing how I humbly presented accurate work, and accurate explanation, because lets face it, I need to explain it, that is how you teach; and you seriously look at it, pondering it more than five seconds long enough to refute me so vehemently out of your plethora of knowledge on the bible you have thoroughly studied day and night and know like the back of your hand, then wouldn’t you have to acknowledge that other truths you have held as self evident, could possibly be wrong. And Viola, you just see a new truth open up in your eyes. Then you say to yourself, wait a min. I’m gonna look up the verse for every time it says the words HELL. Then you learn that there are four different words translated as hell. Then you define a word like HELL, as grave, as death. Then you go back to all the verses and IN CONTEXT, read the verse as God meant for us to read it spiritually. *lest they should be turning about and the Lord be healing them (Matt.13:15).

But, what if you are wrong in not double checking what I had said. That would mean it was you who had the wrong doctrine. But how is knowledge a bad thing, that would only lead you down the true path of understanding.

In view of these many factors limiting the effect of Jesus’ teaching in the hearts of His people, we surely must take special care in attempting to understand His warnings of judgment. If someone is sown “among the thorns,” that is, receives the word in an environment (in which they were “sown”) of many worries of life and struggles to earn money, they will suffer loss for it. But God’s wisdom, in placing only a few in situations where they will understand what they hear, cannot be honored if the lamentation and gnashing of teeth of the many is eternal and hopeless.

From the very lessons of these parables, the meaning of the burning of the darnel (v.30) cannot be everlasting hell. It is more than irreverence, it is a denial of His wisdom and righteousness to speak of God as annihilating or tormenting forever those whom He has blinded, from whom understanding has been taken away, through the instrument of the Adversary.

Their stoutened hearts will bring them eventually to “a furnace of fire” and “lamentation and gnashing of teeth,” but to speak of these results of their sins in terms of the traditional hell is to twist the Scriptures and its revelations of the living, wise and powerful God of all goodness, out of all recognition. God Who kept them from turning about from their self-centered and proud ways will bring them to the realization of the evils of these ways. But this too will be for their good and the glory of God.

As the farmer burns up the darnel after it has been separated from the harvested grain, so also God will exclude those deceived by Satan from the blessings of the kingdom. But this “furnace of fire,” characterized by intense sorrow over their loss will certainly have benefits of opening their eyes and hearts to the truth and an appreciation of God. The sentence is severe, and we would not minimize the severity of its significance, but it is a judgment of God, Who judges in accord with truth and for purposes that harmonize with His glorious Being. This fire and this weeping are divine operations of condemnation, but they are not expressions of some sort of everlasting, hopeless reprobation. Our Lord is not speaking of hell, and it is shameful to obscure His place as Saviour by thus twisting His words.

 

[Ginger2]

Ginger, you surprise me my friend,

Luke 16 is called the parable of the unjust servant.

You’ve read more into my post than was intended.

I did not mean to suggest you misunderstood the meaning of the words.

That said, maybe I misunderstood your interpretation of the verse. I understood you to be saying the unsaved die and are no more. If that is correct, I would ask to you consider how someone who is dead, body and soul, can sorrow?

Now, Luke sixteen does not state it is a parable unless someone **added **a title to the text.

Just so everyone knows, I am not sloughing off. I’m taking a lunch break - dry bread and lunch meat. But when you’re hungry, everything tastes good.

Ginger

 

[Ginger2]

…
Its ok timmy, grandma is dead,. “but is she in heaven she didn’t believe in God, what does God do with her.” Well grandma is dead, she lived her life, she enjoyed it, now she is just dead, she isn’t suffering, she isn’t in pain, she ceases to be,"

Wow, that sounds much more merciful to me.

I hadn’t been following your conversation, but now that you have addressed me, It seems you are depending on what makes sense to your human mind. God is merciful, but God is also just. I don’t have time to find Bible verses, but the Bible does talk about God avenging the blood of the saints.

…All throughout the bible teaches that 39 plus 1 stripe is the most anyman can take for punishment, 40 stripes, 39 -1 stripes, basically 40 stripes is the max,.

41 is abuse.

Even when they scourged Jesus, they made careful not to whip Him more than 40 stripes, they made sure because it was a law set in stone by God. God is merciful and He knows that more than 40 stripes is evil and abuse.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t it the Roman soldiers who beat Jesus?

If it helps the Bible does not say “hell” is forever. But it does say the unsaved will be punished for their sins.

Ginger

…now, back to work…