[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Government adds 50K jobs monthly for two years. Half were Biden's attempt to mask a market collapse with debt.

You’ve Never Seen THIS Side Of Donald Trump

President Donald Trump Nominates Former Florida Rep. Dr. Dave Weldon as CDC Director

Joe Rogan Tells Josh Brolin His Recent Bell’s Palsy Diagnosis Could Be Linked to mRNA Vaccine

President-elect Donald Trump Nominates Brooke Rollins as Secretary of Agriculture

Trump Taps COVID-Contrarian, Staunch Public Health Critic Makary For FDA

F-35's Cooling Crisis: Design Flaws Fuel $2 Trillion Dilemma For Pentagon

Joe Rogan on Tucker Carlson and Ukraine Aid

Joe Rogan on 62 year-old soldier with one arm, one eye

Jordan Peterson On China's Social Credit Controls

Senator Kennedy Exposes Bad Jusge

Jewish Land Grab

Trump Taps Dr. Marty Makary, Fierce Opponent of COVID Vaccine Mandates, as New FDA Commissioner

Recovering J6 Prisoner James Grant, Tells-All About Bidens J6 Torture Chamber, Needs Immediate Help After Release

AOC: Keeping Men Out Of Womens Bathrooms Is Endangering Women

What Donald Trump Has Said About JFK's Assassination

Horse steals content from Sara Fischer and Sophia Cai and pretends he is the author

Horse steals content from Jonas E. Alexis and claims it as his own.

Trump expected to shake up White House briefing room

Ukrainians have stolen up to half of US aid ex-Polish deputy minister

Gaza doctor raped, tortured to death in Israeli custody, new report reveals

German Lutheran Church Bans AfD Members From Committees, Calls Party 'Anti-Human'

Berlin Teachers Sound Alarm Over Educational Crisis Caused By Multiculturalism

Trump Hosts Secret Global Peace Summit at Mar-a-Lago!

Heat Is Radiating From A Huge Mass Under The Moon

Elon Musk Delivers a Telling Response When Donald Trump Jr. Suggests

FBI recovers funds for victims of scammed banker

Mark Felton: Can Russia Attack Britain?

Notre Dame Apologizes After Telling Hockey Fans Not To Wear Green, Shamrocks, 'Fighting Irish'

Dear Horse, which one of your posts has the Deep State so spun up that's causing 4um to run slow?


Religion
See other Religion Articles

Title: Jesus' Teaching on Hell
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://gospelthemes.com/hell.htm
Published: Mar 13, 2009
Author: Samuel G. Dawson
Post Date: 2009-03-13 15:38:22 by richard9151
Keywords: None
Views: 1328
Comments: 83

Most of what we believe about hell comes from Catholicism and ignorance of the Old Testament, not from the Bible. This study will cause you to re-examine current teaching on hell and urge you to further study on what happens to the wicked after death.

"Don't you know that hell is just something the Catholic Church invented to scare people into obedience?"

I was righteously indignant when, a number of years ago, a caller uttered these words on a call-in radio show I was conducting. Perturbed by his haphazard use of Scripture, I pointed out to him and the audience, that hell couldn't possibly be something invented by Catholic theologians because Jesus talked about it. I forcefully read some of the passages where Jesus did, and concluded that hell couldn't possibly be the invention of an apostate church.

I now believe that hell is the invention of Roman Catholicism; and surprisingly, most, if not all, of our popular concepts of hell can be found in the writings of Roman Catholic writers like the Italian poet Dante Alighieri (1265-1321), author of Dante's Inferno. The English poet John Milton (1608-1674), author of Paradise Lost, set forth the same concepts in a fashion highly acceptable to the Roman Catholic faith. Yet none of our concepts of hell can be found in the teaching of Jesus Christ! We get indignant at the mention of purgatory-we know that's not in the Bible. We may also find that our popular concepts of hell came from the same place that purgatory did-Roman Catholicism. The purpose of this study is to briefly analyze Jesus' teaching on hell (more correctly Gehenna, the Greek word for which hell is given), to see whether these popular concepts are grounded therein.

A Plea for Open-Mindedness as We Begin

If we strive for open-mindedness and truly want to know what the Bible teaches, the following quotation will help us in our search:

We do not start our Christian lives by working out our faith for ourselves; it is mediated to us by Christian tradition, in the form of sermons, books and established patterns of church life and fellowship. We read our Bibles in the light of what we have learned from these sources; we approach Scripture with minds already formed by the mass of accepted opinions and viewpoints with which we have come into contact, in both the Church and the world.…It is easy to be unaware that it has happened; it is hard even to begin to realize how profoundly tradition in this sense has moulded us. But we are forbidden to become enslaved to human tradition, either secular or Christian, whether it be “catholic” tradition, or “critical” tradition, or “ecumenical” tradition. We may never assume the complete rightness of our own established ways of thought and practice and excuse ourselves the duty of testing and reforming them by Scriptures. (J. I. Packer, “Fundamentalism” and the Word of God [Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1958], pp. 69-70.)

Of course, Packer just reminds us of Biblical injunctions to test everything proposed for our belief. For example, in II Cor. 13.5, Paul told the Corinthians:

Try your own selves, whether ye are in the faith; prove your own selves.

Likewise, in Eph. 5.8-10, Paul commanded the Ephesian Christians to be involved in such testing:

…for ye were once darkness, but are now light in the Lord, walk as children of light…proving what is well-pleasing unto the Lord.

In New Testament times, one was only a disciple of Christ when he was willing to examine himself, his beliefs, and everything proposed for his belief as a child of light. Nothing less is required now.

Hell vs. Sheol and Hades

We first begin by eliminating the problem the King James Version of the Bible introduced to this study by indiscriminately translating four different words in the Bible as hell: sheol, hades, tartarus, and gehenna.

Sheol Used of Unseen

In the Old Testament, the word for which hell is given in the King James Version is sheol, a word whose root meaning is “unseen.” The King James Version translates sheol as “hell” 31 times, “the grave” 31 times (since someone in the grave is unseen), and “the pit” three times.

Yet in the Old Testament sheol was not exclusively a place of punishment, for faithful Jacob was there (Gen. 37.35, 42.38, 44.29, 31). Righteous Job also longed for it in Job 14.13. David spoke of going to sheol in Ps. 49.15 and Jesus went there, Ps. 16.10 and Acts 2.24-31. In all these cases, these men were “unseen” because they were dead.

Sheol Used of National Judgments

Many times the Bible uses the word sheol of national judgments, i.e., the vanishing of a nation. In Isa. 14.13, 15, Isaiah said Babylon would go to sheol, and she vanished. In Ezek. 26.19-21, Tyre so vanished in sheol. Likewise, in the New Testament, in Mt. 11.23, 12.41, Lk. 10.15, and 11.29-32, Jesus said that Capernaum would so disappear. These nations and cities didn't go to a particular location, but they were going to disappear, and they did. They were destroyed. Thus, sheol is used commonly of national judgments in both the Old and New Testaments.

Hades Used of Anything Unseen

The New Testament equivalent of sheol is hades, which occurs only eleven times. Like its synonym sheol, the King James Version translates the word “hell.” However, the correct translation is hades, or the unseen. The Bible doesn't use hades exclusively for a place of punishment. Luke 16 pictures righteous Lazarus there. Acts 2.27, 31 says Jesus went there. In I Cor. 15.15, Paul used the same word when he said, “O grave, where is thy victory?” In Rev. 1.18, Jesus said he had the controlling keys of death and hades, the unseen, and in Rev. 6.8, death and hades followed the pale horse. Finally, in Rev. 20.13, 14, death and hades gave up the dead that were in them, and were then cast into the lake of fire. These verses illustrate that hades refers to anything that is unseen.

Hades Used of National Judgment

Like its companion word in the Old Testament, hades was also plainly used of national judgments in the New Testament. In Mt. 11.23 and Lk. 10.15, Jesus said Capernaum would go down into hades, i.e., it was going to vanish. In Mt. 12.41 and Lk. 11.29-32, Jesus said his generation of Jews was going to fall.

About hades in Greek mythology, Edward Fudge said:

In Greek mythology Hades was the god of the underworld, then the name of the nether world itself. Charon ferried the souls of the dead across the rivers Styx or Acheron into this abode, where the watchdog Cerberus guarded the gate so none might escape. The pagan myth contained all the elements for medieval eschatology: there was the pleasant Elyusium, the gloomy and miserable Tartarus, and even the Plains of Asphodel, where ghosts could wander who were suited for neither of the above...The word hades came into biblical usage when the Septuagint translators chose it to represent the Hebrew sheol, an Old Testament concept vastly different from the pagan Greek notions just outlined. Sheol, too, received all the dead...but the Old Testament has no specific division there involving either punishment or reward. (Edward William Fudge, The Fire That Consumes [Houston: Providential Press, 1982], p. 205.)

We need to make sure that our ideas concerning hades come from the Bible and not Greek mythology. We have no problem using sheol the way the Old Testament used it, or hades, as the New Testament used it. Both refer to the dead who are unseen, and to national judgments.

Tartarus Is Also Translated Hell in the King James Version

In II Pet. 2.4, we read:

For if God spared not angels when they sinned, but cast them down to hell, and committed them to pits of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;...

The Greek word translated “pits of darkness” here, the only time it's used in the Bible, is tartarus. Again, the KJV gave us hell for free, there being no reason to translate it so. The passages speak of angels that were being punished when II Peter was written, to show that God knew how to treat disobedience among angels. It says nothing about fire, torment, pain, punishment of anyone else, or that it will last forever. It simply doesn't pertain to our subject.

The Popular Concept of Hell Unknown to the Old Testament

Before we move to the gospel's teaching on hell, we want to think further concerning that the word gehenna (popularly mistranslated hell, as we'll see) didn't occur in the Greek Old Testament, the Septuagint. Let's take a few paragraphs to let the significance of that fact soak in. In previous editions of this material, I merely remarked that prominent Old Testament characters like David and Abraham never heard the term or its equivalent. They were never threatened with eternal torment in hell or heard anything like our popular concept now. However, Gehenna's absence in the Old Testament is a much more serious omission than that. (The concepts in this section are suggested by Thomas B. Thayer in his 1855 Edition of Origin and History of the Doctrine of Endless Punishment.)

Before the Mosaic Law

Adam and Eve in the Garden

When God placed Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, he never mentioned the concept of eternal torment to them. Read for yourself-it's just not there. Don't you think it strange that as human history began on this planet, while God explained which tree they could not eat of, that he didn't give the parents of all mankind some kind of warning about eternal punishment, if there was potential for it to be in their future, and the future of all their posterity?

Most of us think eternal torment will engulf the vast majority of mankind, nearly all of Adam and Eve's descendents, yet here's a father, God, who didn't warn his children of the potential of what might befall them. What would you think of a father who told his young child not to ride his bike in the street, and if he did, he would get a spanking. Suppose he also planned to roast him over a roaring fire for fifty years? After he spanked him, would you think him a just father for not warning his child? Can you think of an apology or a defense for him? Yet to Adam and Eve, the father of all mankind failed to mention a much greater punishment than the death they would die the day they ate of the forbidden tree. Was this just a slip of the mind on God's part, to not mention at all the interminable terrible woes that lay ahead for the vast majority of their descendants? No, God announced to them a tangible present punishment the very day they committed the sin: “In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” They found that the wages of sin was death.

Cain and Abel

The same is true with Cain and Abel, a case of murder of a brother. Surely, we would think that God might roll out the threat of eternal torment that Cain was to receive as a warning to all future generations. In the whole account, there's not a hint, not a single word on the subject. Instead, Cain is told, “And now art thou cursed from the earth...When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.” Again, Cain received an immediate, tangible physical punishment administered, with absolutely no warning of future eternal torment. Like Adam, Cain heard none of the dire warnings preached from pulpits of the fiery wrath of God, tormenting his soul throughout eternity.

Now, if Cain were to receive such punishment from God without warning, would God be a just lawgiver and judge to impose additional, infinitely greater punishment with no word of caution whatsoever? In Gen. 4.15, God said, “Therefore, whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him seven-fold.” If, with no warning, Cain was going to receive eternal fiery torment, would those who killed him receive seven times endless fiery torment?

I'm not making light of endless torment, I'm just pointing out that it's remarkable that God hadn't said a word about it thus far in the Bible story.

Noah and the Flood

When we come to Noah and the flood, God noted that “every thought of man's heart was only evil continually,” and that “the earth was filled with violence, and all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.” If not before, wouldn't this be the ideal time to reveal eternal torment ahead for nearly all inhabitants of the earth? If any circumstances warranted such punishment, this would be the time, would it not? However, Noah, “a preacher of righteousness,” didn't threaten endless punishment to evildoers. If warnings of such punishment serve to turn man aside from his evil way, surely this would have been the time to have revealed it, but there's nary a whisper of it. Instead, they were destroyed by the flood, a physical, tangible punishment for their sin, with absolutely no warning of endless torment. Nor was there such a warning when mankind inhabited the earth again after the flood. One word from God might have set the world on an entirely different course. Surprisingly no such word was given.

Sodom and Gomorrah

We could go on with the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, the physical destruction of the cities and their inhabitants, with not even a rumor of endless future torment that we probably think they unknowingly faced. What would we think if our government passed a new law with a huge fine as the punishment, but when a guilty party was found, he paid the fine, but also had to serve endless torment that the citizens had no warning of? What kind of judge explains the law and known penalty, while carefully concealing a much more awful penalty? What would the penalty of a few thousand dollars matter in a case where he was also going to be tormented horribly and endlessly? Yet the popular concept is that the Sodomites were sent into such a judgment.

We could go through the accounts of the builders of the tower of Babel, the destruction of Pharoah and his armies, and Lot's wife, yet we would notice the same thing. All these received a temporal physical punishment, with no mention of an infinitely greater torturous punishment awaiting them in the future.

Was this teaching delibrately excluded from the record, or did it never belong? We know that it isn't there. Neither the word gehenna nor the concept of endless torment was given in the millennia before the giving of the Law of Moses. From the creation to Mt. Sinai, there was simply no insinuation of it in the entirety of human history up to that time. By the conclusion of this study, we'll see that God never had a plan of inflicting such dreadful torment on the people of his own creation.

Under the Mosaic Law

Most of us are familiar with the blessings and cursings Moses pronounced upon the Israelites in Deuteronomy 28-30 before they entered the promised land. If the Jews were disobedient to God, he promised them every conceivable punishment: he would curse their children, their crops, their flocks, their health, the health of their children, the welfare of the nation, etc. He foretold that they would even go into captivity, and would have such horrible temporal physical judgments to drive them to eat their own children. Among such an extensive list of punishments that would come upon his disobedient people, God uttered not even a whisper of endless torment upon them in any case of rebellion. All these physical, temporal judgments would take place in this life.

We could multiply such cases of temporal punishments for rebellion, corruption, and idolatry under Moses. He spelled them out in minute detail. The writer of Hebrews (in 2.2) said: “...the word spoken through angels (the Mosaic Law) proved stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward...” As we've seen, the punishment was physical and temporal with no promise of endless torment whatsoever. Endless torment was simply unknown under the Law.

The question now arises, did every transgressor and disobedient Jew receive just punishment, or not? If they did, will their punishment continue to be just if in the future, they will also receive endless torment in “hell” that they were never told of and knew nothing of? If so, will eternal torment on top of their just physical temporal punishment still be just? It cannot be, can it? How can adding infinite torture in the future that they knew nothing of to a just punishment they received in the past under the Old Testament still be just?

In summary, the popular concept of hell is not found anywhere in the Old Testament. The word gehenna is not even contained in the Greek Old Testament, endless torment is nowhere to be found in its pages.

Where Did the Concept of Endless Torment Originate?

As we've seen, it most certainly did not originate in the Old Testament, either before or during the Mosaic Law. A great deal of evidence (more than we'll give here) suggests that it originated in Egypt, and the concept was widespread in the religious world. Augustine, commenting on the purpose of such doctrines, said:

This seems to have been done on no other account, but as it was the business of princes, out of their wisdom and civil prudence, to deceive the people in their religion; princes, under the name of religion, persuaded the people to believe those things true, which they themselves knew to be idle fables; by this means, for their own ease in government, tying them the more closely to civil society. (Augustine, City of God, Book IV, p. 32, cited by Thayer, Origin & History, p. 37.)

Contriving doctrines to control people? Who would have believed it? Well, the Greek world did, the Roman world did, and evidently between the testaments, the Jews got involved, as well, as the concept of endless torment began appearing in the apocryphal books written by Egyptian Jews.

Thayer wrote further:

Polybius, the historian, says: "Since the multitude is ever fickle, full of lawless desires, irrational passions and violence, there is no other way to keep them in order but by the fear and terror of the invisible world; on which account our ancestors seem to me to have acted judiciously, when they contrived to bring into the popular belief these notions of the gods, and of the infernal regions. B. vi 56.

Livy, the celebrated historian, speaks of it in the same spirit; and he praises the wisdom of Numa, because he invented the fear of the gods, as "a most efficacious means of governing an ignorant and barbarous populace. Hist., I 19.

Strabo, the geographer, says: "The multitude are restrained from vice by the punishments the gods are said to inflict upon offenders, and by those terrors and threatenings which certain dreadful words and monstrous forms imprint upon their minds...For it is impossible to govern the crowd of women, and all the common rabble, by philosophical reasoning, and lead them to piety, holiness and virtue-but this must be done by superstition, or the fear of the gods, by means of fables and wonders; for the thunder, the aegis, the trident, the torches (of the Furies), the dragons, &c., are all fables, as is also all the ancient theology. These things the legislators used as scarecrows to terrify the childish multitude." Geog., B., I

Timaeus Locrus, the Pythagorean, after stating that the doctrine of rewards and punishments after death is necessary to society, proceeds as follows: "For as we sometimes cure the body with unwholesome remedies, when such as are most wholesome produce no effect, so we restrain those minds with false relations, which will not be persuaded by the truth. There is a necessity, therefore, of instilling the dread of those foreign torments: as that the soul changes its habitation; that the coward is ignominiously thrust into the body of a woman; the murderer imprisoned within the form of a savage beast; the vain and inconstant changed into birds, and the slothful and ignorant into fishes."

Plato, in his commentary on Timaeus, fully endorses what he says respecting the fabulous invention of these foreign torments. And Strabo says that "Plato and the Brahmins of India invented fables concerning the future judgments of hell" (Hades). And Chrysippus blames Plato for attempting to deter men from wrong by frightful stories of future punishments.

Plutarch treats the subject in the same way; sometimes arguing for them with great solemnity and earnestness, and on other occasions calling them "fabulous stories, the tales of mothers and nurses."

Seneca says: "Those things which make the infernal regions terrible, the darkness, the prison, the river of flaming fire, the judgment seat, &c., are all a fable, with which the poets amuse themselves, and by them agitate us with vain terrors." Sextus Empiricus calls them "poetic fables of hell;" and Cicero speaks of them as "silly absurdities and fables" (ineptiis ac fabulis).

Aristotle. "It has been handed down in mythical form from earliest times to posterity, that there are gods, and that the divine (Deity) compasses all nature. All beside this has been added, after the mythical style, for the purpose of persuading the multitude, and for the interests of the laws, and the advantage of the state." Neander's Church Hist., I, p. 7. , (Origin & History, 41-43.)

Mosheim, in his legendary Church History, described the permeation among the Jews of these fables during the period between the testaments:

Errors of a very pernicious kind, had infested the whole body of the people (the Jews--SGD). There prevailed among them several absurd and superstitious notions concerning the divine nature, invisible powers, magic, &c., which they had partly brought with them from the Babylonian captivity, and partly derived from the Egyptians, Syrians, and Arabians who lived in their neighborhood. The ancestors of those Jews who lived in the time of our Savior had brought from Chaldaea and the neighboring countries many extravagant and idle fancies which were utterly unknown to the original founders of the nation. The conquest of Asia by Alexander the Great was also an event from which we may date a new accession of errors to the Jewish system, since, in consequence of that revolution, the manners and opinions of the Greeks began to spread among the Jews. Beside this, in their voyages to Egypt and Phoenicia, they brought home, not only the wealth of these corrupt and superstitious nations, but also their pernicious errors and idle fables, which were imperceptibly blended with their own religious doctrines. (Mosheim's Church History, century I pt. I chap. ii.)

A similar statement is made in an old Encyclopedia Americana, cited by Thayer:

The Hebrews received their doctrine of demons from two sources. At the time of the Babylonish captivity, they derived it from the source of the Chaldaic-Persian magic; and afterward, during the Greek supremacy in Egypt, they were in close intercourse with these foreigners, particularly in Alexandria, and added to the magician notions those borrowed from this Egyptic-Grecian source. And this connection and mixture are seen chiefly in the New Testament. It was impossible to prevent the intermingling of Greek speculations. The voice of the prophets was silent. Study and inquiry had commenced. The popular belief and philosophy separated; and even the philosophers divided themselves into several sects, Sadducees, Pharisees, and Essenes; and Platonic and Pythagorean notions, intermingled with Oriental doctrines, had already unfolded the germ of the Hellenistic and cabalistic philosophy. This was the state of things when Christ appeared. (Encyclopedia Americana, art. "Demon, " cited by Thayer (Origin & History, p. 120).

Note that Luke wrote in Ac. 7.22 that “Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians,” yet knowing the Egyptian concepts, he gave not a whiff of endless torment in any of his writings.

Thus, we see that the concept of endless torment afterlife was not found in the Old Testament. It evidently crept in among some Jews during the period between the testaments.

Thayer summarizes the intertestamental period on this subject in the following words:

The truth is, that in the four hundred years of their intercourse with the heathen, during which they were without any divine teacher of message, Pagan philosophy and superstition had, so far as regarded the future state, completely pushed aside the Law of Moses and the Scriptures of the Old Testament, and set up in place of them their own extavagant inventions and fables respecting the invisible world. (Ibid., p. 53)


If you have further interest, there is a lot more information at the site. A LOT more information. This is more complete that what I have posted before, but is basically the same information; hell is a pagan concept grafted onto Christianity. It ia a big part of the aposty of Christianity, along with the immortal soul, trinity, purgatory, 'going to heaven,' and the like.

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-43) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#44. To: Hayek Fan (#43)

What I said is exactly true. The Catholics have a written doctrine. It's easy to find out what they believe about issues like Purgatory because they all believe the same thing. Type in Catholic and Purgatory into Google and walla, you know exactly what they believe and can cut and paste the biblical passages they use all day long. You can't do that with Protestants

Because, in the Bible, there is no pergatory. The catholics created this. After Jesus died on the cross, all who believe in Him and accept Him as their Savior, are now in Heaven. Period. Those believers are called Christians. The catholic church has altered the Word of God into conforming with their own viewpoint and traditions. Nowhere does Jesus say that believers, AFTER His death and resurrection, go to a "waiting place" or any kind of pergatory. Just the catholic church erroneously says this. That is why this doctrine is absent from Christian churches.

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   18:21:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: litus (#42)

what did you refer to pro-war Southern Baptist and an average anti-war Quaker for

You mean why? I used Southern Baptist as an example of pro-war protestants because I live in SW MO which is in the heart of the Southern Baptist Bible belt and they were the first ones to pop into my head and I used the Quakers as an example of anti-war because they have historically been anti-war and they were the first ones to pop into my mind.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976

The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2009-03-15   18:22:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: Hayek Fan (#43)

As far as twisting the Bible to mean anything they want, the fact that there are more than 37000 denominations speaks for itself.

I have already gone over this before. There were factions during the time of Paul, and that is not God's fault, but men. Men are guilty of imposing their own doctrines, traditions and precepts on others, things which are not a part of God's will or his Word.

Blame falls on man's feet for this, not God.

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   18:23:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: litus (#44)

Because, in the Bible, there is no pergatory. The catholics created this. After Jesus died on the cross, all who believe in Him and accept Him as their Savior, are now in Heaven. Period. Those believers are called Christians. The catholic church has altered the Word of God into conforming with their own viewpoint and traditions. Nowhere does Jesus say that believers, AFTER His death and resurrection, go to a "waiting place" or any kind of pergatory. Just the catholic church erroneously says this. That is why this doctrine is absent from Christian churches.

OK. If you say so. I don't care. I'm not here to defend Purgatory or the Catholic Church. Your continued harping on the subject only reinforces my original premise. They claim they have scripture to back up their beliefs, you claim that the scripture they use does not mean what they say it means. Neither side can prove the other side wrong. It's all a matter of whose opinion you want to believe.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976

The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2009-03-15   18:29:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: Hayek Fan (#45)

I used Southern Baptist as an example of pro-war protestants because I live in SW MO which is in the heart of the Southern Baptist Bible belt and they were the first ones to pop into my head and I used the Quakers as an example of anti-war because they have historically been anti-war and they were the first ones to pop into my mind.

And from the beginning, I spoke about translations into English; stating versions, such as the King James Version, the Amplified version, the New American Standard, and the New International Version....ones that those Baptists and Quakers to which you earlier referred, would be those English speaking people found in America, who, if they are reading this thread, would you know exactly which text I am referring to........as it is different from the text found in the Catholic bible. You want to make an issue out of the text and the version and the year it was printed, etc., etc., etc. I will say, again, those people in America, and even in England, are familiar with the books contained in the King James Version and will automatically know to which books I am referring, as compared to the Catholic bible, which includes ~ 7 books found to be FALSE by all the protestant Christian religions....and likely for the reasons, as earlier stated, propounded by Martin Luther at the time of his nailing the 95 Theses.

Once again, for a fifth time, I refer to those versions so that: people who are reading this understand to which Scriptural texts I am referring when I am referring to the Bible.

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   18:37:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: Hayek Fan (#47)

You claim that the scripture they use does not mean what they say it means. Neither side can prove the other side wrong. It's all a matter of whose opinion you want to believe.

Not really. What I mainly did was post your "evidence" in full and I'm letting it speak for itself.

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   18:38:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: litus (#46)

I have already gone over this before. There were factions during the time of Paul, and that is not God's fault, but men. Men are guilty of imposing their own doctrines, traditions and precepts on others, things which are not a part of God's will or his Word.

Blame falls on man's feet for this, not God.

If I am going to be tormented in hell for an eternity because I happened to pick the wrong denomination, then it really doesn't matter whose fault it is. There are dedicated and pious Christians in every single one of those 37000+ denominations who study the bible in good faith and agree with the conclusions their denominations have come up with. I know because I've met them and I'm sure you have too. I reject the idea that dedicated, pious and righteous Christians who spent their entire lives trying hard to live their faith as best as they can will burn in hell for an eternity for not picking the right denomination, or, in your case, rejecting all denominations. A God that would do that is not a righteous God deserving of worship but a wicked, evil child-God who needs a spanking.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976

The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2009-03-15   18:43:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: litus (#49)

Not really. What I mainly did was post your "evidence" in full and I'm letting it speak for itself.

It wasn't MY evidence. I cut and pasted it from various Catholic websites.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976

The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2009-03-15   18:44:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: Hayek Fan (#50)

If I am going to be tormented in hell for an eternity because I happened to pick the wrong denomination, then it really doesn't matter whose fault it is.

You're not going to be tormented in hell for "picking the wrong denomination". But, you will only get to heaven by "doing" the following:

Acts 16:25-33, the jailer anxiously asked Paul, "What must I do to be saved"? Paul answered "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved ..." verse 31".

It doesn't matter what church you attend or don't attend, what rituals you perform or don't perform. There is nothing you "can do" to earn or work for salvation. It is a free gift. You must only believe. If you think you have to "do" something, then the gift is no longer free, and Christ's death at the cross was not good enough or enough, even though He said, "It is finished."

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   18:48:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: Hayek Fan (#51)

My suggestion to any person who disbelieves in God or has questions concerning salvation and the nature of God read the once-atheist C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity, found online or available at your library or local bookstore.

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   18:57:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: litus (#44)

That is why this doctrine is absent from Christian churches.

Claiming the Catholic Church isn't Christian? Then who is the dude on the cross?

What are you smoking?

Recession is when your neighbor loses his job.
Depression is when you lose your job.
Recovery is when Obama loses his job.

Atlas is now shrugging.

mirage  posted on  2009-03-15   19:15:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: mirage (#54)

The Catholic church does numerous things which remove it from what is essentially Christian. You should ask them what they are smoking.

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   19:18:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: litus (#55)

The Catholic church does numerous things which remove it from what is essentially Christian.

According to whose definition?

All the Protestant sects in the Western World are spinoffs from the Catholic Church.

If the Catholics aren't Christian then neither is any Protestant sect nor any group that has come about in the last thousand years. Its axiomatic since none of the Protestant sects have a history of more than 500 years and Christianity is closing in on 2000 years.

Recession is when your neighbor loses his job.
Depression is when you lose your job.
Recovery is when Obama loses his job.

Atlas is now shrugging.

mirage  posted on  2009-03-15   19:39:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: mirage (#56)

According to whose definition?

The Bible.

I don't know anything about the entity which posted what is contained in the following link, but I'm an advocate for not reinventing the wheel when a truth is aptly stated, and it is in its entirety at this link:

http://www.ianpaisley.org/tiara.asp?printerfriendly=true

If you disagree with the point

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   19:43:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: mirage (#56)

If you disagree with the points

made, please back up in Scripture how the Pope and the Catholic church is not in error.

Thanks

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   19:44:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: litus (#57)

If you want to go there, you're refuted by the Bible itself.

John 21:25: Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

So, not everything was written down.

Your argument is one of exclusion. If its not in the Bible it cannot exist? If you cannot prove that everything is in there, then your argument fails.

Put the pipe down. It ain't all in there. Even the Bible itself makes such a statement.

Recession is when your neighbor loses his job.
Depression is when you lose your job.
Recovery is when Obama loses his job.

Atlas is now shrugging.

mirage  posted on  2009-03-15   19:48:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#60. To: litus (#58)

made, please back up in Scripture how the Pope and the Catholic church is not in error.

Don't need to. You don't understand Catholic doctrine.

Infallability doesn't mean they're right. Think about that for a while.

Recession is when your neighbor loses his job.
Depression is when you lose your job.
Recovery is when Obama loses his job.

Atlas is now shrugging.

mirage  posted on  2009-03-15   19:49:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#61. To: mirage (#60)

the pope has made himself the head of the church...he has usurped Christ.

I don't need to study Catholicism; I study Word; where there is error, it is found outside the Word of God. The points made against the Catholics in the link are correct. Refute it from the Word of God, not from catholic tenants.

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   19:52:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#62. To: mirage (#59)

John 21:25: Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

So, not everything was written down.

Your argument is one of exclusion. If its not in the Bible it cannot exist?

Deuteronomy 4:2 "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you."

Revelation 22:19 "If anyone takes away any words from the book of this prophecy, God will take away his portion of the tree of life and the holy city that are described in this book."

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   19:54:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#63. To: litus (#62)

Both of your quotes are out of context.

The admonishment in Revelation only applies to Revelation.

The admonishment in Deuteronomy applies only to the 10 Commandments.

Is that the best you can do? Twist things out of context without understanding them at all? Perhaps you need to learn something about your own religion as opposed to mindlessly parroting things. Understand what it is you are reading and what you are doing. That would be a good place for you to start.

Recession is when your neighbor loses his job.
Depression is when you lose your job.
Recovery is when Obama loses his job.

Atlas is now shrugging.

mirage  posted on  2009-03-15   19:56:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: mirage (#63)

Those are two examples, which are both consistent with God's commands: do not add to or take away from the Scriptures.

I have posted earlier Paul's admonishments against these kinds of things, following man's precepts and traditions. If Paul, who was an Apostle, personally picked by the Lord Jesus, after His resurrection, stated these things are wrong, then who is a pope, or you, to claim otherwise?

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   20:02:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#65. To: mirage (#63)

"Why do you submit to regulations, 21 "Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch" 22 (referring to things which all perish as they are used), according to human precepts and doctrines?" Colossians 2:21

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   20:04:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#66. To: litus (#64)

Those are two examples, which are both consistent with God's commands: do not add to or take away from the Scriptures.

Thank you for leading me to the next argument which says you're full of it.

Where is the table of contents for your Bible in Scripture? Who decides if it is Scripture or not?

Or, put another way, every day, you place Tradition above Scripture.

See, the dirty little fact is, for you to have Scripture, you first have to have a Tradition of using it, otherwise, you wouldn't know what it is.

Tradition gives you the table of contents of your Bible. You can't find it within the pages of your Bible anywhere.

So, how do you reconcile admonishing "Tradition" when you yourself practice it every day?

Sounds like you're a hypocrite. Would you please cite the verses that advise us as to how we should deal with hypocrites like yourself?

Recession is when your neighbor loses his job.
Depression is when you lose your job.
Recovery is when Obama loses his job.

Atlas is now shrugging.

mirage  posted on  2009-03-15   20:13:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#67. To: mirage (#66)

for you to have Scripture, you first have to have a Tradition of using it, otherwise, you wouldn't know what it is.

Not so. I know exactly where to locate every book in the Bible without a table of contents.

Having a table of contents, btw, is not changing the Word of God, not usurping Christ, and not adding to the Word of God, nor more than placing a cover upon which to bind the book does it change the Word of God.

Saying the pope is the head of the Christian church is a flagrant change in the Word of God and contradicts what Christ says of Himself: the He alone is the Head of the Church...and that is in Scripture.

Nice try but you've fallen flat.

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   20:20:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#68. To: mirage (#66)

The Pope claims the place and names that belong to God alone (Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, III para. 18).

1. God, the Father: He claims he is "The Holy Father". This is the unique name of God the Father.

John 17:11 "And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are." — ‘Thine own name!’ It is God's name alone - it cannot belong to anyone else.

Matthew 23:9 "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven."

2. God, the Son: He claims he is "The Head of the Church". This title belongs to Christ alone.

Colossians 1:18 "And [Christ] is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence."

Ephesians 5:23 "For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body."

3. God, the Holy Spirit: He claims he is "The Vicar of Christ". This is the office of the Holy Spirit alone.

John 14:26 "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you."

litus  posted on  2009-03-15   20:22:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#69. To: Hayek Fan (#16)

So who is correct? No one knows.

It isn't in the Bible. It isn't hinted at in the Bible. So if you believe the Bible then you can't believe the Catholics.

Old Friend  posted on  2009-03-15   20:43:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#70. To: mirage (#15)

No such thing.

How do you know? Are you God?

Read the Bible. It is from God. Then you will know too.

Old Friend  posted on  2009-03-15   20:46:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#71. To: Old Friend (#69)

So who is correct? No one knows.

It isn't in the Bible. It isn't hinted at in the Bible. So if you believe the Bible then you can't believe the Catholics.

So you say. They obviously believe it is biblical and I've cut and paste the biblical passages they believe justifies it. Neither of you can prove the other right or wrong. It's all opinion. So you can damn them and they can dman you until you're blue in the face.

Tastes Great! Less Filling! LOL!

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976

The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2009-03-15   20:50:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#72. To: Hayek Fan (#71)

I've cut and paste the biblical passages they believe justifies it.

There is no purgatory according to the Bible. No verse hints at it.

Old Friend  posted on  2009-03-15   20:59:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#73. To: Old Friend (#72)

There is no purgatory according to the Bible. No verse hints at it.

There's no toilet paper according to the bible either. No verse hints at it. I suggest you stop wiping your ass because if you don't you are going to go to hell! LOL!!

Seriously though, I don't care. The only thing your argument does is reinforce the thesis of my orginal post.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976

The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2009-03-15   21:04:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#74. To: Hayek Fan (#73)

There's no toilet paper according to the bible either. No verse hints at it. I suggest you stop wiping your ass because if you don't you are going to go to hell! LOL!!

Seriously though, I don't care. The only thing your argument does is reinforce the thesis of my orginal post.

Your analogy sucks ass.

Old Friend  posted on  2009-03-15   21:10:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#75. To: Old Friend (#74)

Your analogy sucks ass.

It wasn't an analogy, it was a joke. Hence the LOL! and the "seriously though"

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976

The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2009-03-15   21:16:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#76. To: Hayek Fan (#75)

It wasn't an analogy, it was a joke

Ok...hahahahhahahah :)

Old Friend  posted on  2009-03-15   21:17:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#77. To: litus (#17)

Wow. Just wow. First you claim if we only followed Scripture agreements would rise and divisions reduced. You then state in the following paragraph we have arguments because said Scriptures are and have been translated into so many languages over time; what are the proper meanings/context. You can't have it both ways. You can't tell me if we all followed the Bible, we'd have unity and then tell me we have divisions because no one can understand what the Bible says.

Furthermore, the original 1611 version of the King James Bible contained the Apocrypha. The Protestant fathers, Luther included, said the Apocrypha was useful for reading and instruction but not necessary as part of the Canon of Scripture. Not necessary is not the same as "false". It hasn't been until the last 100-120 years that the Protestants have started omitting the Apocrypha.

The Eastern Churches and the Roman Church based their decision on the Jewish Canon submitted to Alexandria. Post Christianity, the Jews re-worked their Canon to fully remove such books as Sirach, Wisdom, Maccabees, etc., which was later modeled by the Protestants. Early Protestants saw Roman corruption and teaching, some it backed by the Apocrypha, looked at the "new" Jewish Canon and decided to go with that source. Granted, this is a simple version of events.

But one has to ask themselves why the Jews re-worked their Scriptures in the first place. My next question to you is if you have ever read it (The Apocrypha)? Take this for example:

10 Let us oppress the poor righteous man, let us not spare the widow, nor reverence the ancient gray hairs of the aged. 11 Let our strength be the law of justice: for that which is feeble is found to be nothing worth. 12 Therefore let us lie in wait for the righteous; because he is not for our turn, and he is clean contrary to our doings: he upbraideth us with our offending the law, and objecteth to our infamy the transgressings of our education. 13 He professeth to have the knowledge of God: and he calleth himself the child of the Lord. 14 He was made to reprove our thoughts. 15 He is grievous unto us even to behold: for his life is not like other men's, his ways are of another fashion. 16 We are esteemed of him as counterfeits: he abstaineth from our ways as from filthiness: he pronounceth the end of the just to be blessed, and maketh his boast that God is his father. 17 Let us see if his words be true: and let us prove what shall happen in the end of him. 18 For if the just man be the son of God, he will help him, and deliver him from the hand of his enemies. 19 Let us examine him with despitefulness and torture, that we may know his meekness, and prove his patience. 20 Let us condemn him with a shameful death: for by his own saying he shall be respected. 21 Such things they did imagine, and were deceived: for their own wickedness hath blinded them.

If I'm claiming Christ isn't the Messiah, I'd want that out of my Scriptures very quickly.

"What began in Russia will end in America."- 1930, Elder Ignatius of Harbin, Manchuria.

scooter  posted on  2009-03-16   2:19:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#78. To: scooter (#77)

Furthermore, the original 1611 version of the King James Bible contained the Apocrypha. The Protestant fathers, Luther included, said the Apocrypha was useful for reading and instruction but not necessary as part of the Canon of Scripture. Not necessary is not the same as "false". It hasn't been until the last 100-120 years that the Protestants have started omitting the Apocrypha.

Why the Apocrypha Isn't in the Bible.

Catholics will tell you, "You Protestants are missing part of the Bible. We have the rest of it." This can throw people off, but it no longer has to. These false Catholic additions to the Bible are commonly called the Apocrypha or sometimes the Deuterocanonical books. This is a short treatise on WHY these books are not in the Bible.

What is the Apocrypha anyway?

The Apocrypha is a collection of uninspired, spurious books written by various individuals. The Catholic religion considers these books as scripture just like a Bible-believer believes that our 66 books are the word of God, i.e., Genesis to Revelation. We are going to examine some verses from the Apocrypha later in our discussion.

At the Council of Trent (1546) the Roman Catholic religion pronounced the following apocryphal books sacred. They asserted that the apocryphal books together with unwritten tradition are of God and are to be received and venerated as the Word of God. So now you have the Bible, the Apocrypha and Catholic Tradition as co-equal sources of truth for the Catholic. In reality, the Bible is the last source of truth for Catholics. Catholic doctrine comes primarily from tradition stuck together with a few Bible names. In my reading of Catholic materials, I find notes like this: "You have to keep the Bible in perspective." Catholics do not believe that the Bible is God's complete revelation for man.

...

Wasn't the Apocrypha in the King James?

The King James translators never considered the Apocrypha the word of God. As books of some historical value, the Apocrypha was sandwiched between the Old and New Testaments as an appendix of reference material. This followed the format that Luther had used. Luther prefaced the Apocrypha with a statement:

"Apocrypha--that is, books which are not regarded as equal to the holy Scriputres, and yet are profitable and good to read." King James Version Defended page 98.

In 1599, TWELVE YEARS BEFORE the King James Bible was published, King James said this about the Apocrypha:

"As to the Apocriphe bookes, I OMIT THEM because I am no Papist (as I said before)..."

King James Charles Stewart
Basilicon Doron, page 13

Not only this, but the sixth article of the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England (1571 edition) states:

In the name of the Holy, we do vnderstande those canonical bookes of the olde and newe Testament, of whose authoritie was never any doubt in the Churche...

Now concerning the apocrypha it states,

And the other bookes, (as Hierome sayeth), the Churche doth reade for example of life and instruction of manners: but yet doth it not applie them to establish any doctrene [sic].

Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1977, Vol. III, pp. 489-491.

The Apocrypha began to be omitted from the Authorized Version in 1629. Puritans and Presbyterians lobbied for the complete removal of the Apocrypha from the Bible and in 1825 the British and Foreign Bible Society agreed. From that time on, the Apocrypha has been eliminated from practically all English Bibles--Catholic Bibles and some pulpit Bibles excepted.

[snip] http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/apocryph.htm

litus  posted on  2009-03-16   2:29:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#79. To: scooter (#77)

Wow. Just wow. First you claim if we only followed Scripture agreements would rise and divisions reduced. You then state in the following paragraph we have arguments because said Scriptures are and have been translated into so many languages over time; what are the proper meanings/context. You can't have it both ways. You can't tell me if we all followed the Bible, we'd have unity and then tell me we have divisions because no one can understand what the Bible says.

Not at all what I said...read what I actually stated and get back to me with an honest comment and honest question concerning my own statements, not yours.

Thanks

litus  posted on  2009-03-16   2:31:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#80. To: All (#78)

http://watch.pair.com/apocrypha.html

8. ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE CANONICITY OF THE APOCRYPHA

# They are not, and have never been, in the Jewish canon. # Josephus explicitly excluded them from his list. # Philo (20 B.C.-50 A.D.) neither mentions or quotes them. # They were never quoted or alluded to by Jesus Christ or any of the apostles. The sermons in the Book of Acts, which outline Jewish history, do not included apocryphal events. # Jewish scholars meeting at the Council of Jabneh did not recognize them. # Most Church Fathers in fact rejected them. # None of the Apocrypha claim inspiration or divine authority. # Many of the Apocryphal books contain historical, geographical, and chronological errors. # Many of the Apocryphal books teach heresy, contrary to the Word of God. # Their literary style is legendary and fantasy. Some stories are grotesque and demonic. # They lack the power and distinctive elements of the Word of God.

litus  posted on  2009-03-16   2:38:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#81. To: litus (#79)

As far as Christianity, itself, if the religions of the world which claim to be Christian, actually followed what is in the Holy Scriptures, rather than religious dogma and human created traditions, you would see agreements rise and divisions reduced.

My original comments- Wow. Just wow. First you claim if we only followed Scripture agreements would rise and divisions reduced.

Finally, since the Holy Scriptures (the books found in the King James Version, for example, as opposed to the "Jehovah Witnesses' Bible" or the "Catholic Bible")....not one book was ever originally written in English, so there have been arguments since their translation from Aramaic, Latin, Greek, etc., as to the most proper or exact meaning, as the translators were not only dealing with translation of just the words, but the context in which particular words would make the most sense in English (and English culture and understanding).

My original comments- You then state in the following paragraph we have arguments because said Scriptures are and have been translated into so many languages over time; what are the proper meanings/context. You can't have it both ways. You can't tell me if we all followed the Bible, we'd have unity and then tell me we have divisions because no one can understand what the Bible says.

Care to enlighten me where I mis-interpreted that?

"What began in Russia will end in America."- 1930, Elder Ignatius of Harbin, Manchuria.

scooter  posted on  2009-03-16   12:31:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#82. To: scooter (#81)

As far as Christianity, itself, if the religions of the world which claim to be Christian, actually followed what is in the Holy Scriptures, rather than religious dogma and human created traditions, you would see agreements rise and divisions reduced.

My original comments- Wow. Just wow. First you claim if we only followed Scripture agreements would rise and divisions reduced.

Not true. Your original comments sliced and diced mine, You claim I said the following:

Wow. Just wow. First you claim if we only followed Scripture agreements would rise and divisions reduced. You then state in the following paragraph we have arguments because said Scriptures are and have been translated into so many languages over time; what are the proper meanings/context. You can't have it both ways. You can't tell me if we all followed the Bible, we'd have unity and then tell me we have divisions because no one can understand what the Bible says.

What I said was as follows (the part you left out is in struck out; the part you added is in bold):

You're arguing about the various religious practices and beliefs, created by MAN.

And, whenever you have any group of men together, you will never find 100% agreement on anything.

As far as Christianity, itself, if [we] the religions of the world which claim to be Christian, actually followed what is in the Holy [only followed] Scriptures , rather than religious dogma and human created traditions, you would see agreements [would] rise and divisions reduced.

Altogether different meanings, context, and most especially...POINT. I see you like to do with others' words what you do with the Bible. Just slice and dice and add to or take away from...."same difference," as long as it says what YOU CLAIM it says.

To continue, you then claim I said:

You then state in the following paragraph we have arguments because said Scriptures are and have been translated into so many languages over time; what are the proper meanings/context.

But what I actually stated was:

Finally, since the Holy Scriptures (the books found in the King James Version, for example, as opposed to the "Jehovah Witnesses' Bible" or the "Catholic Bible")....not one book was ever originally written in English, so there have been arguments since their translation from Aramaic, Latin, Greek, etc., as to the most proper or exact meaning, as the translators were not only dealing with translation of just the words, but the context in which particular words would make the most sense in English (and English culture and understanding).

And was, mainly, in response to this comment made by the poster:

So who is correct? No one knows. The Catholics can't prove they are right and the Protestants can't prove they are right. Yet both sides try to make everyone else believe that if they don't follow their brand of lunacy then they are going to rot in hell. Actually, "both sides" is not the correct term because there are literally more than 37000 denominations of "Christianity." The chances of getting the correct 1 of 37000+ denominations is pretty small so why bother? You can either live like a hedonist and have a great time on earth so that you can burn in hell forever after you die, or you can live a pious life on earth following the precepts of your denomination only to be told, "oops, wrong choice" and be rewarded with the same eternal damnation as the hedonist, your whole life a waste.

Therefore, I can have it "both ways." There is difficulty in translating the original language into English for numerous reasons, one being, in the Greek, there are at least 3 different words for the English word "love." This makes it more difficult to find an equivalent meaning for the word use in Greek for English readers and understanding. Over those types of translations, there will always be disagreements between men as to what the "most proper" word choice should have been or could have been. Additionally, at the time of translation, some hundreds of years ago, no culture was similar to English-speaking culture and norms, as is the case today, English-speaking cultures vary, from each other and even more especially differs from the period of time the different texts were written.

You have been most disingenuous in your attempts to change what I stated and deliberately, it appears, to muddy the waters into making claims I never made.

Any educated person, most especially those who have a degree in education, or have a degree in English language, or in literature, or speak multiple languages, understand these simple facts.

litus  posted on  2009-03-16   21:28:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#83. To: All (#82)

You're arguing about the various religious practices and beliefs, created by MAN.

And, whenever you have any group of men together, you will never find 100% agreement on anything.

As far as Christianity, itself, if the religions of the world which claim to be Christian, actually followed what is in the Holy Scriptures , rather than religious dogma and human created traditions, you would see agreements rise and divisions reduced.

Paul warns against following the traditions and ordinances of man. Christianity is at danger, on the one hand, of becoming nothing more than a philosophical exercise, and, on the other, weighed down with doing nothing more than following empty rituals, legalistic practices. These are things that Jesus warned about and greatly condemned against the Pharisees. The Apostle Paul also gave warnings against looking to things outside of Christ, outside of His Word, to legalistic practices, the ordinances of man, the rituals of religion, these types of things which lead the believer away from Christ and into believing and doing things outside the Word of God.

See, for example, Paul's writings in Colossians 2:

8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.

9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, 10 and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority. 11 In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.

13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.

And, again, in Romans 7 we read:

4 So, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God. 5 For when we were controlled by the sinful nature, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies, so that we bore fruit for death. 6 But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

litus  posted on  2009-03-17   10:18:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]