Ruth on Question on God, Consequences, Beliefs and Avoiding the Questions

[JoeFlux]

Letting people off and giving them no punishment is thus not just.

I see. So if you stand before the judge guilty and yet someone has paid the debt in full in your behalf then its OK for him to still toss you in prison even though the debt has been fully paid?

Yes, because that makes no sense at all. Do you think that would happen with any real judge? If a murderer committed a crime, do you think the murderer should be let free if someone else is willing to do the prison time instead?

Do you really want that sort of justice system? Where we can send other people to jail instead of the person that committed the crime? Does that sound just to you?

 

[Ruth]

I personally believe that the extortion of eternal torment or bow to God is the number one reason people don't pursue the religion of Christianity. It is probably one of the most important topics Christians should be discussing because it represents God's character to the lost. If wrong, which I believe those who teach eternal torment are, then they are putting a huge stumbling block before many and representing God to be a cosmic monster.

Your personal beliefs? This worries me that you are relying on your personal beliefs about something as important as this.

Do you believe that when we are born again we are indwelt by the Holy Spirit and He becomes our teacher? Scripture says that His sheep know His voice and follow Him.

Do you believe God is just? The bible says God is just.
God is Love but also just.

I agree 100%. Why would you think I didn't believe that?

What you believe makes Christ irrelevant.
He died to save us from what exactly?

Whoa - do you realize what you are saying? That eternal life in heaven is worthless is what you infer. Does God really need to threaten people with a horrific eternal fate for them to then choose self preservation to bow to Him? I know for a fact He doesn't.

Christ told us many times why He came and the purpose of His sacrifice. It was to give us eternal life. When Adam and Eve were barred from the garden of Eden, they were barred so they did not eat of the tree of life and become eternal in their fallen state. Those who are redeemed are given access to the tree of life again to have eternal life.
There is no tree of life in hell and without it, we are mortal beings. We have victory over death solely through the work of Christ and our faith in Him and through His grace.
Those who reject Him will pay their own debt, whatever God determines that to be, and then will perish, just as Jesus said (John 3:16)

 

[Ruth]

I'm strong enough in my faith and far enough along in my walk to know that nothing I can say will change your mind

It's an interesting difference between religion and science.

No scientist would say what you just said here. I do not rely on faith, but only on evidence. If you provided me evidence that my understanding was wrong, I would change my understanding.

I beg to differ. You rely on your faith in scientists. They have no definitive evidence.

You believe in evolution and yet there is not one ounce of proof.

This is completely wrong. But are you "strong in your faith" that evolution is wrong, such that nothing I can say will change your mind?

Is it at least possible for me to convince you, with evidence and reason, that there is proof for evolution?

Absolutely not. You are a few decades late in my journey over that issue and it failed miserably and I have to laugh every time I hear someone who is convinced it is 'fact.'

I know I will not convince you there is a God so why are we doing this?

It's easy to convince me. Simply provide evidence of a God. It's that easy. I change my mind based on evidence and reason

I'm not falling for it. You have not shown one iota of being open to change your mind.

And 'evolution' knew this about us and wove it in.

No, evolution is not intelligent. Appreciation for beauty would come about as a result of random mutations which are then naturally selected for due to the offspring of animals that appreciate beauty surviving better than those that don't.

You give a lot of credit to happenstance if you don't think that a creature evolving to be better is without any intelligence involved. Every time I listen to an evolution believer they always say 'evolution gave them this' etc. That implies intelligence whether you admit it or not.

What are God's favorite colors? Green, brown, and blue. They are the color of our eyes and the color of the earth, plants, and ocean. Coincidence? I doubt it.
The beauty of a sunset and the array of flowers and birds and scents of flowers are that way to embelish our lives. Our eyes were made by our creator so we could see color and appreciate the beauty. Evolution wouldn't care about beauty or pleasant smells etc.

Please don't bother to try to come up with some 'logical' explanation of how evolution KNEW (implying intelligence) those things would cause us to do this or that. Humbug.

So you believe, as Darwin did (and don't you dare deny this because it is the subheading of his book) that you evolved from apes and the negro species in Africa were savages evolved from apes and a lesser being (closer to animal) than whites?

Black people and white people are just as equally evolved from apes. What makes you think that black people are less evolved? Just because of the colour of their skin?

That isn't what I believe at all but what Darwin taught in his book. It is what your science friends believed. Read Darwin's original book. The subheading tells it all. It also is why people of color have always been held down - because Darwin reasoned that white people were more highly evolved. You don't like that - take it up with the people who hold Darwin up as a genius. He was just a racist who saw apes in Africa and the African people and wrote a book claiming that evolution began with apes (look at any timeline of evolution it always shows the ape evolving into an African human and then to a white person) and that the darker the skin, the closer to apes they still were.

They've worked hard to candy coat the obvious and push it under the rug as not really what he said but all the historical documents point to it, as does history itself.

 

[Ruth]

The bible also says that God is merciful.

Just and merciful are not compatible. You can't be both.

God is the ultimate judge and a judge's punishment must the fit crime.

Yet God has provided a way out. Showing His mercy.

God is both merciful and just.

That's contradictory. If he doesn't punish people for their crimes, then he's not just. As you said, the punishment must fit the crime. Letting people off and giving them no punishment is thus not just.

If you really believed that then you should believe in God and that there will be justice when we die. I know plenty of people who live their entire lives and never suffer for their crimes against others. Our sense of inborn justice is God given. We need to see justice. And those of us who have come to a saving faith and sought His forgiveness have gone through great agony as He reveals our sins and we feel the pain we caused to others, to Him, to ourselves. Sometimes, working through that remorse takes a lifetime. So no one walks away without suffering. Those of us who came to a saving faith dealt with it and were forgiven so when we enter eternity, we are truly free. He gave us eternal life. Those who reject His gift of forgiveness and truly understanding remorse, will enter into judgment and pay their debt and then perish. I know it will not be eternal torment but it will be a suffering I wouldn't wish on anyone and then, knowing they could have lived in heaven forever and enjoyed true love and forgiveness will be their greatest remorse before they perish and will be eternally dead.

 

[JoeFlux]

I'm strong enough in my faith and far enough along in my walk to know that nothing I can say will change your mind

It's an interesting difference between religion and science.

No scientist would say what you just said here. I do not rely on faith, but only on evidence. If you provided me evidence that my understanding was wrong, I would change my understanding.

I beg to differ. You rely on your faith in scientists. They have no definitive evidence.

Absolutely and completely incorrect. Give a single example.

You believe in evolution and yet there is not one ounce of proof.

This is completely wrong. But are you "strong in your faith" that evolution is wrong, such that nothing I can say will change your mind?

Is it at least possible for me to convince you, with evidence and reason, that there is proof for evolution?

Absolutely not. You are a few decades late in my journey over that issue and it failed miserably and I have to laugh every time I hear someone who is convinced it is 'fact.'

I thought so.

This is called a closed mind. When you admit that it is impossible even in principle for you to be persuaded by evidence.

I know I will not convince you there is a God so why are we doing this?

It's easy to convince me. Simply provide evidence of a God. It's that easy. I change my mind based on evidence and reason

I'm not falling for it. You have not shown one iota of being open to change your mind.

Sure I have - I'm the complete opposite of you: I've agreed over and over that I'd change my mind based on the evidence. So provide me evidence of a God, and I'll believe.

What are God's favorite colors? Green, brown, and blue.

How do you know this? Maybe his favourite color is pink, but just thought that pink oceans and grass would look silly.

It also is why people of color have always been held down - because Darwin reasoned that white people were more highly evolved.

The timelines don't match up. "On the origin of species" was first published in 1859. The US signed the emancipation proclamation 4 years later.

But let's look at the bible instead:

"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)"

 

[JoeFlux]

The bible also says that God is merciful.

Just and merciful are not compatible. You can't be both.

God is the ultimate judge and a judge's punishment must the fit crime.

Yet God has provided a way out. Showing His mercy.

God is both merciful and just.

That's contradictory. If he doesn't punish people for their crimes, then he's not just. As you said, the punishment must fit the crime. Letting people off and giving them no punishment is thus not just.

If you really believed that then you should believe in God and that there will be justice when we die.

That makes no sense.

Our sense of inborn justice is God given.

Then why does our inborn sense of justice go against what the bible says? The bible says that God killed innocent children and babies just to punish the Pharaoh, when trying to free the slaves. That goes against all modern sensibilities regarding justice.

we feel the pain we caused to others, to Him, to ourselves.

What about the pain that God has caused to others? What about the millions he caused pain to when he drowned them in a flood? Will they ever get justice against God?

Those who reject His gift of forgiveness and truly understanding remorse, will enter into judgment and pay their debt and then perish. I know it will not be eternal torment but it will be a suffering

A loving God that will torture anyone who refuses to worship him.

How lovely and Christian.

 

[Ruth]

I'm strong enough in my faith and far enough along in my walk to know that nothing I can say will change your mind

It's an interesting difference between religion and science.

No scientist would say what you just said here. I do not rely on faith, but only on evidence. If you provided me evidence that my understanding was wrong, I would change my understanding.

I beg to differ. You rely on your faith in scientists. They have no definitive evidence.

Absolutely and completely incorrect. Give a single example.

LOL Give you an example of no definitive evidence? You're hilarious.

You believe in evolution and yet there is not one ounce of proof.

This is completely wrong. But are you "strong in your faith" that evolution is wrong, such that nothing I can say will change your mind?

Is it at least possible for me to convince you, with evidence and reason, that there is proof for evolution?

Absolutely not. You are a few decades late in my journey over that issue and it failed miserably and I have to laugh every time I hear someone who is convinced it is 'fact.'

I thought so.

This is called a closed mind. When you admit that it is impossible even in principle for you to be persuaded by evidence.

Do you exist? How do you know you exist? Are there absolutes? Yes, absolutely.
A person's mind is only closed if they refuse to examine ALL of the evidence and possibilities. That would apply to you, not me.
I have examined all the so called 'evidence' that the religion of evolution present and find it seriously flawed.
What about the possibility that there are dimensional doors that species go through and some get trapped here and die before they go back to their other dimension?
What about the possibility that aliens left life there and are observing how we have progressed?

The idea that the theory of evolution is fact is to close ones mind to the possibility of any other theories and even to intelligent design.
You demand proof of God but you have accepted little proof of the theory of evolution.

I know I will not convince you there is a God so why are we doing this?

It's easy to convince me. Simply provide evidence of a God. It's that easy. I change my mind based on evidence and reason

I'm not falling for it. You have not shown one iota of being open to change your mind.

Sure I have - I'm the complete opposite of you: I've agreed over and over that I'd change my mind based on the evidence. So provide me evidence of a God, and I'll believe.

I agree that we are opposites. I have actually examined ALL evidence, as well as sincerely searched for God and you have accepted what has been spoon fed to you by gurus of the religion of humanism.

If I'm going to accept something that science says is a fact, I don't accept theories and holes. I only accept fully proven facts.

When it comes to putting my faith somewhere, which requires enough truth that I accept it even if I cannot prove it to someone else without doubt, then I can accept not fully poving it - that is why it is called faith.

Evolution isn't science - it is the religion designed to explain creation without a creator.

What are God's favorite colors? Green, brown, and blue.

How do you know this? Maybe his favourite color is pink, but just thought that pink oceans and grass would look silly.

I provided my answer to why I know that (even though it was tongue and cheek) but you conveniently removed it from my response. I will provide it again.
The color of our eyes (all living creatures) are green, brown, and blue. And the color of the earth, sky, sea, and plants are green, brown, and blue.
Then He decorates with all the other colors with those three colors as the background.

It also is why people of color have always been held down - because Darwin reasoned that white people were more highly evolved.

The timelines don't match up. "On the origin of species" was first published in 1859. The US signed the emancipation proclamation 4 years later.

LOL You really are lost. What in the world does the US have to do with anything? Do you think slavery began and ended with the US? Public school educated I see.

But let's look at the bible instead:

"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)"

I've already told you that I don't accept the Bible as inerrant. And that is one of the reasons. While I believe that God's word is contained within it, man has added a lot to justify their own views and excuses.

I know who God is and He is perfect love and perfect justice. A lot of what is in the Bible that is attributed to God are simply the writings of men hiding behind claiming God told them to do it.

 

[Ruth]

The bible also says that God is merciful.

Just and merciful are not compatible. You can't be both.

God is the ultimate judge and a judge's punishment must the fit crime.

Yet God has provided a way out. Showing His mercy.

God is both merciful and just.

That's contradictory. If he doesn't punish people for their crimes, then he's not just. As you said, the punishment must fit the crime. Letting people off and giving them no punishment is thus not just.

If you really believed that then you should believe in God and that there will be justice when we die.

That makes no sense.

Our sense of inborn justice is God given.

Then why does our inborn sense of justice go against what the bible says? The bible says that God killed innocent children and babies just to punish the Pharaoh, when trying to free the slaves. That goes against all modern sensibilities regarding justice.

we feel the pain we caused to others, to Him, to ourselves.

What about the pain that God has caused to others? What about the millions he caused pain to when he drowned them in a flood? Will they ever get justice against God?

I can't answer all the questions about why God did what He did but I do know that I am in no position to judge Him.

Those who reject His gift of forgiveness and truly understanding remorse, will enter into judgment and pay their debt and then perish. I know it will not be eternal torment but it will be a suffering

A loving God that will torture anyone who refuses to worship him.

How lovely and Christian.

So you think a pedophile, rapist, murderer, or abuser of children should just die and never face any justice if the court system never brought them to justice? They just get to live their putrid lives and cause all kinds of horror to others and never suffer one moment for what they did?
How human of you.

 

[CoreIssue]

It is hard to resist jumping feet first into a good debate. But, I will restrain myself and limit it to just tossing in some information. But just one the issue of Annihilation.

One word used to support the doctrine is "perish." In example:

John 3:16 (New International Version)
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

Here is the meaning of the Greek word "perish" in the verse.

mifrom (575) and the base of (3639)
Transliterated WordTDNT Entry
Apollumi1:394,67
Phonetic SpellingParts of Speech
ap-ol'-loo-mee Verb
Definition

1. to destroy
   1. to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin
   2. render useless
   3. to kill
   4. to declare that one must be put to death
   5. metaph. to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell
   6. to perish, to be lost, ruined, destroyed
2. to destroy
   1. to lose

The word does not mean annihilation. It means to be stopped, taken out of the way, etc.

In the OT the prophet said people perish without a vision. They didn't die or cease to exist.

The Rich Man and Lazarus clearly show the Rich Man aware, alive and in torment in Hell. The Second Resurrection at the end of time is of the damned, again clearly they are not annihilated, but they were in Hell.

Matthew 25
41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels...
46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”"

Revelation 14
They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke of their torment will rise for ever and ever. There will be no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and its image, or for anyone who receives the mark of its name.”

Strong's Number: 929
Original WordWord Origin
basanismovßfrom (928)
Transliterated WordTDNT Entry
Basanismos1:561,96
Phonetic SpellingParts of Speech
bas-an-is-mos' Noun Masculine
Definition

1. to torture, a testing by the touchstone, which is a black siliceous stone used to test the purity of gold or silver by the colour of the streak produced on it by rubbing it with either metal
2. torment, torture
   1. the act of tormenting
   2. the state or condition of those tormented

Hell and all in it are cast into the Lake for eternity. Annihilation is not eternal torment or punishment since what does not exist cannot be tormented, punished or feel anything. Especially for eternity.

I believe the issue is the lack of understanding and acceptance mercy, justice and love are not incompatible or irreconcilable terms.

That is my 2 cents here. Just giving you guys some more information to consider and discuss. Have fun, I will go back to working on some other things.

 

[Ruth]

It is hard to resist jumping feet first into a good debate. But, I will restrain myself and limit it to just tossing in some information. But just one the issue of Annihilation.

One word used to support the doctrine is "perish." In example:

John 3:16 (New International Version)
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

Here is the meaning of the Greek word "perish" in the verse.

mifrom (575) and the base of (3639)
Transliterated WordTDNT Entry
Apollumi1:394,67
Phonetic SpellingParts of Speech
ap-ol'-loo-mee Verb
Definition

1. to destroy
   1. to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin
   2. render useless
   3. to kill
   4. to declare that one must be put to death
   5. metaph. to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell
   6. to perish, to be lost, ruined, destroyed
2. to destroy
   1. to lose

The word does not mean annihilation. It means to be stopped, taken out of the way, etc.

In the OT the prophet said people perish without a vision. They didn't die or cease to exist.

The Rich Man and Lazarus clearly show the Rich Man aware, alive and in torment in Hell. The Second Resurrection at the end of time is of the damned, again clearly they are not annihilated, but they were in Hell.

Matthew 25
41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels...
46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”"

Revelation 14
They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke of their torment will rise for ever and ever. There will be no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and its image, or for anyone who receives the mark of its name.”

Strong's Number: 929
Original WordWord Origin
basanismovßfrom (928)
Transliterated WordTDNT Entry
Basanismos1:561,96
Phonetic SpellingParts of Speech
bas-an-is-mos' Noun Masculine
Definition

1. to torture, a testing by the touchstone, which is a black siliceous stone used to test the purity of gold or silver by the colour of the streak produced on it by rubbing it with either metal
2. torment, torture
   1. the act of tormenting
   2. the state or condition of those tormented

Hell and all in it are cast into the Lake for eternity. Annihilation is not eternal torment or punishment since what does not exist cannot be tormented, punished or feel anything. Especially for eternity.

I believe the issue is the lack of understanding and acceptance mercy, justice and love are not incompatible or irreconcilable terms.

That is my 2 cents here. Just giving you guys some more information to consider and discuss. Have fun, I will go back to working on some other things.

You are towing the company line and ignoring the very basic points that I made about eternal life. That issue alone should cause you to stop and consider the truth.

Why did Jesus say He was offering us eternal life if we already had it but it was just a matter of where we spent it?

There are two ways to look at an issue - defending what you already believe using the tools those who teach it have preserved and fed you or looking at it anew.

The idea of eternal torment is entirely a 'Christian' doctrine. Jews don't believe it nor ever taught it.

I reject being referred to with semantics such as 'annihilation.' I refer to the words God used in Genesis 3 and Jesus used throughout His ministry = perish.

If you are simply interested in defending the man made doctrine of eternal torment, then there is no point in our discussion.

If you are interested in researching it with fresh eyes, I would recommend you consider watching this:
http://youtu.be/oHUPpmbTOV4
I promise you. It is well presented and well worth your time. It is respectful and aptly researched. It is not associated with any sect of Christianity but simply taking on a doctrine that too many blindly accept as Biblical when it is anything but.

If you prefer reading then Edward Fudge presents his well researched findings in A Fire That Consumes or Hell, a Final Word
http://www.edwardfudge.com He has a whole page on amazon with all of his books available there.

There are more and more mainstream Christians who are realizing the error of the doctrine. David Reagan of Lamb and Lion ministries also has written a book and embraced the truth over the error of ECT (eternal conscious torment)

Bottom line is, God has no need to blackmail people/or more accurately extort people into heaven with a threat of eternal torment. And He does not, anywhere in scripture. It is a man made doctrine used by pulpits to scare people into their buildings. Fear of God in being under judgement to what He determines to be an appropriate punishment may it be a year, a decade, or a century is just. But to threaten it as never ending is not of God nor ever has been.

The words and scriptures have been contrived to convince people it says what it doesn't say.

Bottom line, if there were any such threat, God would have told Adam and Eve in the beginning and the disciples would have done a much better job of making the extortion clear.

 

[roman8]

Ruth, you said that you do not believe that the bible is inerrent, if so, what errors do you believe are contained in the scriptures ? and what is your basis for truth.

 

[Ruth]

Ruth, you said that you do not believe that the bible is inerrent, if so, what errors do you believe are contained in the scriptures ? and what is your basis for truth.

I'm going to answer your question this way: God spoke the universe into existence. Is it really difficult to believe He can speak to the sincerely seeking heart who wants to know and love Him?

• If someone never saw a Bible, they could come to a saving faith by the Holy Spirit speaking God's truth to their seeking heart. Paul said that no one is with excuse. That tells me that God is perfectly capable of speaking to and teaching the seeking heart.
• Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would teach us all we need to know.
• Jesus said that we need to seek God and ask and He will respond as a Father responds to a child.
• Jesus said that His sheep know His voice and listen to Him.
  
• I came to a saving faith and let Him teach me. I learned to discern His counsel over my own or any other voice by testing the scriptures against what I heard and learned.
• I measure everything against these points: Does it glorify God? Does it point to the cross? Is it founded in love and justice? If whatever I hear or read does not meet those criteria, I reject it until the Lord prepares my heart to see where it would. If He never does, I continue to reject it. I think that the Bible has been corrupted over time to have the corruption of men's hearts embedded in it for their nefarious reasons. God would never tell them to kill and rape women or children. I also don't think God would condone slavery, et al.
  
• People who question me in my approach are those who have taken the trust that men have been faithful to God in writing that book. Even if what is written is contrary to what He speaks to their heart. I would rather trust God to speak to my heart then tell people that a loving God did those things in the Bible to innocent people.
  
• And finally, Jesus corrected the Jews regarding what they claim God said in the OT. Jesus said, "You have heard it said, but I tell you" so right there, either Jesus isn't the same God of the OT (which I know He is) or He is telling all of us that there are things in the OT that were written by men and He was setting things straight.

Either God can speak to each heart who sincerely seeks Him or God is limited to what men wrote in a book. When I read things written in a book that my heart tells me is just wrong and contrary to God's nature, then I have every right to reject it regardless of how many try to convince me it is inerrant.

I hope that answers your question. I am also very aware of the backlash the religion of Christianity gives to anyone who dares to question the book as written or the doctrine of eternal torment, infant baptism, etc. It's okay.

 

[CoreIssue]

You are towing the company line and ignoring the very basic points that I made about eternal life. That issue alone should cause you to stop and consider the truth.

I am only responding to this point.

What company line? I am non denominational and arrived at my beliefs through in-depth study.

I do not find what you claim about eternal life in the Bible after over 50 years of study.

I believe the Bible is to be read literally, using rules of grammar, word meaning, etc. It says it is to be read and understood by ALL, not SOME.

Either you accept the Bible as inerrant or you do not. If not inerrant than none of it can be trusted.

I accept it. You do not. So, we disagree.


Remember, the Bible says the human heart is very deceitful (Jeremiah 17:9).

 

[Ruth]

You are towing the company line and ignoring the very basic points that I made about eternal life. That issue alone should cause you to stop and consider the truth.

I am only responding to this point.

Why do you not answer my other points?

What company line? I am non denominational and arrived at my beliefs through in-depth study.

I meant no disrespect but you are presenting arguments that are used to support the doctrine. You are not standing back and considering the issue from the bigger picture and God's message from Genesis to Revelation.

I do not find what you claim about eternal life in the Bible after over 50 years of study.

Really?
Genesis 3
17 To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’
“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”
20 Adam[c] named his wife Eve,[d] because she would become the mother of all the living.
21 The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. 22 And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” 23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken.

And we do not see access to the tree of life to live forever again until Revelation
Revelation 2:7

Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who is victorious, I will give the right to eat from the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.

Jesus tells us His reason for coming and never mentions rescuing us from eternal life.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

If eternal torment were fate of the lost then God failed to tell us that in the two key places when it would have been said.

The 'company line' is to simply assume the doctrine is true and use the scriptures and arguments they developed to defend it. I hope you consider that it may be an error and look at it anew.

At least watch the video. At the very least, you will arm yourself with more ammunition to try to debunk me.

I believe the Bible is to be read literally, using rules of grammar, word meaning, etc. It says it is to be read and understood by ALL, not SOME.

Either you accept the Bible as inerrant or you do not. If not inerrant than none of it can be trusted.

I accept it. You do not. So, we disagree.

I also know that there are many saved who will never see a Bible and never see a missionary. It will be the angels who will deliver the gospel to the whole world before the end comes, not man.
Revelation 14:6
[ The Three Angels ] Then I saw another angel flying in midair, and he had the eternal gospel to proclaim to those who live on the earth—to every nation, tribe, language and people.

Remember, the Bible says the human heart is very deceitful (Jeremiah 17:9).

Yes, that is my point in why I don't accept the Bible as inerrant. Men put it together and Jesus spent a great deal of time trying to correct them on some of the major points.

1. Matthew 5:21
   [ Murder ] “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’
   • Matthew 5:27
     [ Adultery ] “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’
   • Matthew 5:33
     [ Oaths ] “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’
   • Matthew 5:38
     [ Eye for Eye ] “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’
   • Matthew 5:43
     [ Love for Enemies ] “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’
   • 1. Matthew 5:22
        But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.
        • Matthew 5:28
          But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
        • Matthew 5:32
          But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
        • Matthew 5:34
          But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne;
        • Matthew 5:39
          But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.
        • Matthew 5:44
          But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,

So Jesus had a problem with some of what men put into the Bible claiming 'God said' too.

 

[CoreIssue]

Hi, Ruth.

I didn't answer it all simply because being Admin can cause some tensions among posters. They get nervous when Admin gets involved.

My posts were to bring out some points that add to the conversation between you and others. Our debating distracts from that goal.

 

[Ruth]

Hi, Ruth.

I didn't answer it all simply because being Admin can cause some tensions among posters. They get nervous when Admin gets involved.

My posts were to bring out some points that add to the conversation between you and others. Our debating distracts from that goal.

Thank you for your kindness in answering that question.
I can assure you, I am not in the least bit nervous based on your title. This is your website. I respect it.

I share what I have learned. I was just listening to the video again by Edward Fudge. Each time I listen to it, the points he makes are so obvious it is amazing that it has gone unchallenged in the religion of Christianity all these years.

The issue of doctrines that are not Biblical ( as is the ECT doctrine) gained roots in early RCC. The protestant religion (offshoots of RCC) carried these doctrines and traditions from there.
People not being able to read, they listened and believed what men told them. It isn't until this generation that we have access, through the internet, to more insights and truths to let the original message of Christ be told to all.

If anyone examines the common message throughout scripture that God offers life or death. He asks us to choose life. The wages of sin is death. Jesus came to offer us eternal life.

I am particularly troubled when I read that someone, when challenged on ECT, asks the question, "Then what did Jesus save us from?"
That is an alarming statement showing exteme misunderstanding of what His amazing gift truly is.

Jesus came to offer us eternal life. Without Him, judgment and death for the lost.

I challenge anyone to find where God says faith or suffer eternal conscious torment. You won't find it. You will find scriptures that people read INTO that is what it says but when taking the religion of Christianity glasses off - it doesn't say that at all. And the way many words are translated and we have been taught they supposedly say, seem to support the doctrines taught but they don't.

1. 1 Corinthians 15:55
   “Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?”
   • 56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law.

Consider the gospel message to the lost that Jesus came to offer them eternal life. That heaven will be perfect love and no more tears. Where the lion and lamb will be at peace. If they reject His gift, they will pay their own debt, however and in whatever way God judges that to be, and then they will perish.

Take the eternal concious torment out of the equation and the hearts of the lost look anew at the amazing message in the gospel. It is no longer extortion but a genuine choice.

 

[roman8]

So are you saying the NT is inerrent , and the OT is error filled? What about the original texts that we have , approx 5000 texts that agree with one another. Other than some spelling issues and other small things that take away nothing from the meaning of the text. Im trying to understand your position.

If you are using the bible to show the errors in the bible then your truth comes from yourself , you are the final judge and not God. Who claims his word is Pure . Something cannot be pure and yet full of error.

How do you know that it is the Holy spirit that is leading you and not some other spirit. I know you say you test it against scripture , but if it is error filled then how do you really disern ? Again you must decide and not God , that elevates you to a position higher than him. Im not debating your position on Hell at this time just the stand that you take on bible truth.

 

[Ruth]

So are you saying the NT is inerrent , and the OT is error filled?

No, I didn't say that.

What about the original texts that we have , approx 5000 texts that agree with one another. Other than some spelling issues and other small things that take away nothing from the meaning of the text. Im trying to understand your position.

You put your faith in the idea that men, at some point, knew what was God's word and what to write down and what wasn't. I put my faith in the living God who asked me to seek Him with all my heart and I did. I know my beloved Shepherd's voice and follow Him.

If you are using the bible to show the errors in the bible then your truth comes from yourself , you are the final judge and not God. Who claims his word is Pure . Something cannot be pure and yet full of error.

The Bible does contain God's word but not all of it is God's word. I don't worship a book. I worship God. I don't follow what men have written down simply because they wrote it down unless God confirms to my heart that it is indeed His word. There are portions of the Bible that I have never had Him confirm to my heart are His word but actually contrast what who I do know Him to be.

How do you know that it is the Holy spirit that is leading you and not some other spirit. I know you say you test it against scripture , but if it is error filled then how do you really disern ? Again you must decide and not God , that elevates you to a position higher than him. Im not debating your position on Hell at this time just the stand that you take on bible truth.

Evidently you believe that God could speak to men so long ago but not today. You think that God is limited in His communication to what was written by those men and we don't dare question it.

What about people who never see a Bible or a missionary? Do you think God is able to speak to their heart and save them?

You claim to believe the Bibls is inerrant, then why don't you believe it?
John 10:27
My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.
John 14:26
But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.
1 Corinthians 6
19 Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;

With all due respect, I am not asking for your approval or validation. I share what I have learned and you can test it or not, accept it or reject it. I know Him, I have walked with Him a long time now, I have no doubts, and I walk with a peace and joy that surpasses all understanding. I have His validation and that is all I need.
Romans 8:16
The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.

I test everything against the three questions I posted earlier.

 

[roman8]

Ruth you quote alot of scripture that you claim was not penned by man under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit( which means God breathed) but "written" by men that the bible says have wicked hearts.

You would not know these things unless you had the scriptures to start with. All wisdom begins and ends with God. The scripture itself testifiys of its inerrency.

No one worships a book but the living God who is Christ who is THE WORD. The scripture tells us that it is all we need, no longer do we need any extra biblical revelation or personal revelation. the WORD is alive , whom is Christ. We do hear his voice, he speaks to me everyday through his word and the Holy Spirit leads me and teaches me as to the meaning of it.
As far as those whom have not heard the word of God, you presuppose that somehow God owes us that , the Potter owes nothing to the clay, but he promised in his word that if you seek him you will find him and I have full confidence that he will send someone to them if they are seeking. To believe the bible is not Pure and preserved as God has said it is, is to call him a liar. There are many things that I do not understand why the Lord did things a certain way , but we should never come to the conclusion that his word to us is in error.

 

[Ruth]

Ruth you quote alot of scripture that you claim was not penned by man under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit( which means God breathed) but "written" by men that the bible says have wicked hearts.

Let me try this one more time. I believe God's word is within the Bible but not everything within the Bible is God's word. I quote what is confirmed to me is His word.
I'm sorry if you are unable to comprehend that or choosing not to but I can't say it any plainer.

You would not know these things unless you had the scriptures to start with. All wisdom begins and ends with God. The scripture itself testifiys of its inerrency.

Yes, all wisdom begins and ends with God. That does not mean that everything men wrote down and said "God said this" is what God said.
1 John 4 tells us that God is love. Where is there any love in telling Israel to kill children and women? There are too many things that simply malign God's character and are inconsistent with His message to claim the book is inerrant.

No one worships a book but the living God who is Christ who is THE WORD.

Yes, The Word IS Christ, not the written Bible as given to us. Scripture tells us that He will teach our hearts what we need to know.

You never answered my question - do you think if someone never see a Bible or meets a missionary that God can still save them?

The scripture tells us that it is all we need, no longer do we need any extra biblical revelation or personal revelation.

I never claimed personal revelation. I don't add to the scriptures one bit. I simply let the writer discern what is His and what it means. I don't rely on flawed human beings to tell me and I don't rely on flawed human beings to point to a book and claim everything in it is God's word and I dare not question it.

the WORD is alive , whom is Christ. We do hear his voice, he speaks to me everyday through his word and the Holy Spirit leads me and teaches me as to the meaning of it.

That is all I am saying with me. I just also listen when He tells me that some parts are NOT His word but added by men.

As far as those whom have not heard the word of God, you presuppose that somehow God owes us that , the Potter owes nothing to the clay,

No one said God owes us anything. Please don't put words in my mouth. However, scripture does say that He wants NONE to perish and we know the only way someone is not saved is if they use their free will to reject His gift. So then, it doesn't take someone to have to read, understand, and have a preacher teach them Greek to come to a saving faith. They don't need the Bible to be saved. Therefore, God can and does speak directly to the seeking heart.

but he promised in his word that if you seek him you will find him and I have full confidence that he will send someone to them if they are seeking.

Yep - with or without the book or a missionary.

To believe the bible is not Pure and preserved as God has said it is, is to call him a liar. There are many things that I do not understand why the Lord did things a certain way , but we should never come to the conclusion that his word to us is in error.

I don't think God is a liar at all. I think men are. I think men that do greedy things like raping or killing and will claim God told them to do it and convince others to add it to their book to justify themselves in history.

I look at God's character as I know Him. If it doesn't glorify Him - it isn't HIS WORD.
I don't understand why that is so hard to believe.