mrpataki:

Wow this is beautiful, scripture with scriptures.

God bless you all. I will be back to add my own inputs soon.

How bodi? Lol.

We go wait for your addition - would be really appreciated! Bless up.

@lysaa,

lysaa:

@ shahan
Are u for the Blues?
Just saw your reply on the other side, hope to meet u morrow, until then. .

KEEP LIVING IN AN ATMOSPHERE OF MIRACLES

This love-tango we recently developed between us will last!

I really was for hooting Arsenal. . . but em. . .until recently.
Where you go, shahan will follow - BLUES! _{until they mess up again!}

@zebra,

zebra:

But why was Cain wicked?? He had all the characteristics of Lucifer and not Adam because Adam was not wicked and so was his son Abel.

What are the characteristics of Lucifer - please can you list all of them?

zebra:

I think the the truth is being hidden from us.

O jibi-jibi-jibi!! So, could we surmise that the scenario of Satan's crafty deceit at Eve is replaying itself all over again in your case? I sincerely hope NOT. "But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ" (II Cor. 11:3).

zebra:

Just like we were made to believe that it was an apple tree and apple that made Adam and Eve to sin.

Where did you read an "apple tree" in the Genesis account?

zebra:

My born-again friend said that though the Bible did not come out openly to say it and that except you give spiritual meaning to it you will always believe that it was an apple that caused Adam and Eve to sin. The truth of the issue was that Lucifer decieved Eve and slept with her and nothing like apple.

I knew this was coming - when the devil finds a willing candidate for his deceit, he speaks of giving a "spiritual meaning" to the plain declarations in the Scripture. Once a person swallows his bait, that which Scripture calls a "SNARE" becomes a reality unto such (II Tim. 2:26). While there's still time NOW, read God's Word as it is given.

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:
In all honesty Shahan an exposition was given on what Revelation 20:10 really means in the light of how the early writers used their words, or how they expressed themselves idiomatically.

Many thanks for yours; but then the "exposition" on Revelation 20:10 comes out all the weighter in that expressed by syrup and others after her.

Bobbyaf:
It was already explained to the fora, and possibly you if you read it, that the phrase forever and ever is a faulty translation. No honest greek student including myself, could possibly walk away accepting that translation of forever and ever, when what was meant was "from ages unto the ages when we stop to consider that the original phrase existed in the plural.

As rendered in the KJV, the translation is accurate and not faulty. No honest student of the Greek language would imagine that the same term as applied to God Himself means "from ages unto the ages". If that were the case, what are such "honest" Greek students to understand by God "who lives from ages unto the ages"?

Even if one should be a little teasing with that nomenclature, it would only further weaken your arguement. This is what Rev. 20:10 would read if we pander to your arguement: ". . . and shall be tormented day and night from ages unto the ages" - which comes full circle to our own persuasion rather than yours.

That being so, what then would this expression convey to your understand - "tormented. . .from ages unto the ages"??

Bobbyaf:

The reality is the true expression as found in the greek as it pertains to the wicked points to periods of time, and not eternity. The strange thing is is that you will accept that phrase to be limited when it is used to describe the limited life of a slave as used by Moses, but you fail to see the context of Revelation 20:10 to be the same.

Should we take your own "true expression" as indicative of a limited time in the Revelation, then as syrup has pointed out you most likely would have the same problem with accepting its application in the case of God who lives "for ever and ever".

The stranger thing is that you earlier tried to force the expression to apply in all cases; but retraced your steps when offered a clear text that evidences the direct opposite of what you hold.

Bobbyaf:

As I have said so many times if a few passages seem to run contradictory to the weight of evidence of those scriptures that point to a literal and final destruction of the wicked, then why struggle with a few difficult passages just to prove a point?

There's no struggling with 'a few difficult passages' just to prove any point; and it is rather the case in the persuasion of the annihilationists who still struggle with Revelation 20:10.

Bobbyaf:
Please find those translations that give the proper rendition of the greek, and stop confining yourself to a traditional version that may have been faulty translated in some instances. You have to read between the lines.

I believe the "traditional version" of the KJV and others are precisely correct, after having compared various renderings in other versions. Some others like Darby which render it as "for the ages of ages" may be correct but weak. Reading that text "between the lines " does not take away from the gist of our persuasion as stipulated earlier.

@TV01,

Perhaps you have issues with people and that's why I've noticed your heated responses lately, which is not amusing. That said, we can just do this simply and progress the discussion, or lead it whichever way you please.

TV01:

1. Let the discussion rest on it's merits. I don't believe anyone is taking a position just for the sake of arguement.

Whatever you meant by that still does not take away from my observation. Even you would have to admit that your inputs actually indicate your own position in your arguements.

TV01:

2. We all have different ways of articulating, it is not hard to see what Sage means. If you are not sure, please ask!

How many times have I asked - or do you deliberately choose to miss them? What does sage mean that is any different from what I pointed out?

TV01:

3. Can we keep this to the scriptural merits or otherwise of the points raised and not venture into the ad-hominem.

And were my rejoinders anywise different from your hint in your statement above; or where have I deviated from the "scriptural merits" of points raised? The ad-hominem you saw in mine that is vacant in others didn't reach your expectations, did it?

TV01:

It's not your place to perjoratively label maturity, understanding or leading that differs from yours, even if you are 100% correct. Like I said

Sorry, neither is it yours to do so - even though you have done so severally. I don't see you vaunting this self-importance in the views of others who take your lead - but when it comes to those you disagree with, then your fingers are quick to the keyboard.

TV01:

Who said anyone has a problem with it? I don't deny or overlook it's presence. There is a dissonance between my reading of scripture up until this verse. It would be dishonest to re-interprete or ignore my whole reading up till this point on the basis of the one verse/section of scripture.

I haven't particularly referred to you in that regard; and if you feel touched enough to take center stage, then my points still stand - like I said. I don't know that many number of people who read Scripture with a "dissonance".

TV01:

My initial default position after becoming a Christian (and even as an unbeliever) was eternal torment. I had no questions about it as such. But after scrutinising related scriptures and doctrines ("immortality of the soul", destruction, death, eternal life etc), I have cause to question it.

Granted - we all have adjustments in our views when we learn new things. Mine are borne out of a study on the subject and the fact that there are more questions unanswered in the 'annihilationist' persuasion.

TV01:

What exactly do you understand and how? And why do you assume my position is driven by feeling? There is an almost overwhelming weight of scripture that suggests eternal destruction for the wicked. Especially when one properly aligns, death, eternal life, immortality and other doctrines that tie closely into this.

I don't remember having denied that the Bible speaks of 'everlasting destruction' - and you could scroll just above in the previous page and see where I outlined them, which I repeat here:

shahan:

I believe the Bible mentions such concepts as 'everlasting destruction' (II Thes. 1:9), 'everlasting judgment' (Heb. 6:2), 'eternal damnation' (Mark 3:29); and 'everlasting punishment' (Matt. 25:46) - and in themselves they are not contradictory. This is not the case with sage's idea of "eternal annihilation" as annihilation is nowhere taught in Scripture.

What we have been attempting to examine from all sides is just what is conveyed in meaning by such terms rather than "an almost overwhelming weight of scripture that suggests eternal destruction", as you supposed. That was why I earlier asked about the meaning of such terms. Those who espouse annihilation, a cessation of life, etc. have yet to plainly articulate those concepts from Scripture.

For instance, I offered a question to sage to please provide a verse in Scripture where we might read that Jesus went to the place prepared for the devil and his angels (the LAKE of FIRE) - which is yet unanswered. Pushing his ideas of 'eternal annihilation' hasn't helped his persuasion at all as long as the Bible does not teach what he seeks to establish.

TV01:

We'd all appreciate if you outline your understanding of those verses.

I suppose you could get them from my posts. Making blank statements like yours is not exactly my tuff; and you're not obliged to offer any if you so prefer.

TV01:

Firstly, I don't see eternal torment necessarily implied in the scriptures quoted. That is your reading of it.

Granted - in just exactly the same way that "eternal destruction" is not implied in Scripture in your private reading.

TV01:

Matthew 25:Everlasting fire ~ Means just that, fire that cannot be quenched until it fully consumes. This is clearly outlined in 2 Peter 2:6 & Jude 7.

Sorry, the Lord did not once introduce an "UNTIL" in Matt. 25:41 & 46. This is a classic example of the 'force-fit' you once decried. If you prefer to gather its comparative meaning from other verses, then see Mark 9:43-44 where the Lord intimated that the fire shall NEVER be quenched! Where then is the correlation between your idea of "UNTIL" and the Lord's "NEVER"??

TV01:

Likewise Everlasting punishment is easily understood as an irrevocable judgment. The second death is final, from which there will be no ressurrection or further pardon, hence the judgment handed down is final, eternal.

Irrevocable and final - yes indeed. And how does that remove from the issue of the wicked being tormented "DAY and NIGHT" that extends to "FOR EVER and EVER"??

TV01:

Mark  9: As above.

Aye - and my response above.

TV01:

Luke 16: Even if one adopts a literal interpretation to this parable, there is nothing to suggest that the time spent by the wicked in hell is eternal. Is there anything, anywhere in scripture to suggest that Abrahams bosom is heaven?

Another force-fit. Has anyone suggested that Abraham's bosom is HEAVEN? And to your idea that "there is nothing to suggest that the time spent by the wicked in hell is eternal" - I wonder if that was another terse quip to deny the theory you espouse of the punishment of the wicked being ETERNAL. . . or, one is to understand that the wicked won't be in their place of judgement for so long, and we should scribble an "UNTIL" by the margin?

TV01:

The rich man arrayed in "purple" almost certainly represenas the rich law bound priestly elite, whilst lazarus represents the poor/gentiles who have Abrahams faith. It's a parable. Jesus was demonstrating to the stiff-necked, hard-headed, religious jews that the KOG was being opened up to the nations.

Hardly the case. 'Purple and fine linen' were expressive of wealth in Biblical language (see Esther 8:15 and Ezek 16:13); and both Jews and Gentiles (whether rich or poor) are among those who have Abraham's faith. One doesn't have to be poor or a Gentile in order to have the faith of Abraham; and the Lord's intended purpose in the parable was for all, rather than just to 'religious jews'.

TV01:

The notion that the grave has two distinct parts one for the wicked and one for the righteous is nowhere portrayed in the bible. It is from old Jewish lore. One that The Lord used to make a point.

TayoD's outline helps clear the air on the issue. However, I fail to see how the Lord Jesus would use an 'old Jewish lore' to establish a Biblical point where in fact the Spirit warns against that very tendency (Titus 1:14 & II Pet. 1:16).

TV01:

This does not butress your position. Personified or literal, they are both cast into the lake of fire to be consumed.

It only weakens your argument, for my response to your earlier question was precisely to the point.

TV01:

Suppose all you will, it changes nothing. If I was "unwilling to look" as you suggest, I would have stuck with all my default or recieved positions. Passages elsewhere clearly teach that death is just that. If there is no cessation of life, what need ressurection?

I find this come back really hilarious. A default or received position(s) in your case flagellates back and forth in your arguments; for those who "stand" before God to be judged are called "the dead" (Rev. 20:12), which in its context shows that they were quite aware of the judgement taking place. If the dead are "just that" - "dead" (as a matter of "cessation of life" - what point is to be made from the fact that they "STAND" before God to be judged?

TV01:

Shahan wrote;
The one question I would like to ask about this idea that Jude 7 points to finality of judgement: Will the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah escape the FINAL Judgement in Revelation 20:12-13?

My response;
Surely it can't be hard to see that the "example" that God made of S&G is exactly a type of what the 2nd death would be. Final, eternal, unchangeable, irrevocable.

Nevermind the political answer to circle round the question. Here again: "Will the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah escape the FINAL Judgement in Revelation 20:12-13?"

TV01:

Presumably you can read eternal torment into the "example" of S&G. I would appreciate your doing so, be it, literally or figuratively.

What does Revelation 20:10 say to you, TV01?

TV01:

In as much as you purported to be trying to help, thanks.

You're not obliged to sweat a vaunted rejoinder with sly undertones if you don't find mine useful. Cheers.

@mrpataki,

No vex - I was going to reply to yours but was running late for a p.m. Bible Study. Yes, I love ZUMA, but I'm afraid some of 'em Yahoo games could be so addictive - and shahan no dey hear word when she sits to play!!

@lysaa,
Dem like or not, we go smoke all 'em GUNNERS with our special-make double barrel! No kidding. . . I go start the shooting first; and if you no hear anoda 'gbosa', no wait to find out wetin follow - you hear??

@damosky,

damosky:

why is shahan not back to reply?

Okay, here is shahan! I had to take a break to attend an evening Bible Study, and my replies will follow consequently. However, I'll quickly attend to yours:

damosky:

i was waiting to see shahan reply to tv01. while i awiat her reply and enjoy this enlightening thread, i have a little question to throw out there. the bible says that there is going to be a ressurection of both the righteous and the unrighteous and they would be judged according to their deeds. if then you have recieved your judgement and sent to hell fire, would you be ressurected back, then judged, then sent back to hell? why would there be judgement for those who have recieved the judgment of eternal torment again?

I don't see how your concern is borne out of my inputs; for I nowhere hinted at a repeated or recurring judgement in any one of my posts.

damosky:

looking forwad to hear shahan's reply!

As given briefly. Others will follow soon - but can't miss my 'fresh fish peppersoup' first!

@Backslider,

Backslider:

I will give you another one just hold on

Thanks again for yours; and since you asked me to hold on, my replies could not have come any earlier.

Backslider:

We Worship a great God and no one can claim to know him completely. I sometimes like the way you do your academic summaries of post I think you should be doing that to the Bible also, it will help your understanding.

You're absolutely right about the highlighted line in yours; and we can only do our utmost to know Him as much as He reveals Himself by the Spirit.

Again, I could only do my best to deal with issues to the point - and that's why most of my inputs summarizes the gists of those I respond to. I'm not so sure if one can also summarize the Bible in that respect. . . but, Lol. . . I'm just being me.

Backslider:

Look at where it said Jacob I love Esau I hate. Apostle paul ask the Question can anyone question God? Who will Judge God.

Right, are we back to the issue of HATE and ANGRY? I believe there's a world of difference between the two; and therefore maintain the position earlier enunciated in my previous posts.

Backslider:

In Other words we can not completely understand God by our analizes but the spirit of God.

Agreed. Cheers.

@lysaa,

Please enjoy your evening, and the Lord bless you. I'm still learning and growing, and indeed will not claim to have knowledge that I don't. That would especially apply to the fresh point your brought out about the Trinity - an interesting one, no doubt. There's a thread where I'd been trying to treat that subject, and Lord willing will continue sometime soon.

However, I think no one can improve on your erudite statement that:

lysaa:

Its hard to differentiate the persons of the Godhead for they are one and same but their mainifestations tells us who is in operation at different point in time.

Exactly to the point.

I would have to acknowledge your take on Isaiah 63:10 even though I'm strongly persuaded that the whole context is otherwise as you interpreted it, especially in light of comparing it with other texts.

Much grace.

@Backslider,

Okay, thanks for pointing that out - but it still it hasn't brought out distinctly where in that chapter in Genesis 18 the Holy Spirit is seen as "the angel of the LORD's presence".

In the verses highlighted, the LORD is said to have appeared to Abraham and spoken to him (verses 1 & 20). Notice that it was the LORD Himself, and not an angel who appeared to the patriarch. However, just who was it that "appeared" to Abraham??

We are told in the previous chapter 17 that, "the LORD appeared to Abram" (vs. 1); and also that, "God went up from Abraham" (vs. 22). This has been the very same language maintained through Biblical history until Stephen in the NT said: "The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham" (Acts 7:2).

Reading all this in line with Exodus 6:2-3 might help put this in perspective:

"And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the LORD: And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them."

So, you see that the One who appeared to Abraham in Genesis 18 is the LORD in His pre-incarnate ministry; and not the Holy Spirit.

Now in respect of the other two "men" along with the LORD who appeared unto Abraham (vs. 2), some believe them to be representing the Son of God and the Holy Spirit. But notice what was said of them:

"And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the LORD" (ch. 18:22).

"And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground" (ch. 19:1).

"And the men said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? son in law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whatsoever thou hast in the city, bring them out of this place: For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it." (ch. 19:12-13).

I do not necessarily subscribe to the views of some who feel that these two "men" or "angels" are the Son and the Spirit. According to Gen. 19:13, they confessed that "the LORD" had sent them to destroy the place. The angels appeared in the form of "men"; but they are not to be mistaken for the Son and the Spirit. More so to the point is that there cannot be more than one LORD (or Jehovah - Deut. 6:4): and in no verse were the "angels" in Genesis 18 & 19 referred to as "God" or "the LORD."

It seems obvious that the term "angel of the LORD" (or, "angel of God"/"angel of the LORD's presence" would be pointing to none other than to Christ who as God was presented in His pre-incarnate ministry. It is clear from Exo. 3:2-6 that "the angel of the LORD" is Himself the very God worshipped by the Jews. He also was the same "angel" who followed the Israelites through their journeys in the wilderness (compare Exo. 13:21 and 14:19). It is until we turn to the NT and read I Cor. 10:4 before we can grasp this:

"And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ."

The spiritual Rock was not some massive stone rock following them; for the sense that the apostle presents is that same which any Jewish reader was familiar with, such as in Psalm 18:2 & 31 ~~ "The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; my God, my strength, in whom I will trust; my buckler, and the horn of my salvation, and my high tower. . . For who is God save the LORD? or who is a rock save our God? "

Psa. 62:2 & 6 - "He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved."

If there's anyone called "the angel of the LORD", He is none other than the Lord Jesus Christ Himself in His pre-incarnate ministry.

@Backslider,

Backslider:

@Shahan

I will not call you a heretic here but I guess you have erred a little.

Thank you for being that gracious. However, it appears you haven't helped clarify where I erred a little.

@lysaa,

Your input has blessed, humbled and refreshed me - no kidding. May God blessed and fill you more.

Now let me offer a few pointers:

lysaa:

That's true, but I respect people's experiences. Cos when one has such experience, it gives that person a new balance in viewing the things of God. Knowledge of God are in various ways and one of them is the experiential one which includes u participating in the picture; whether by seeing or hearing or feeling. . but we bear in mind Rom 8;14 and not people's experiences. In as much as I regard people's encounter, my perception of the Holy Spirit in/through His word is still esteemd highest.

Apt.

lysaa:

There's no where in the Bible that could be quoted from that he wept but in Rom 8:26-27, The type of Prayer involved here is not just a person's but two involved, we and the Holy Spirit. He's present and could be said participating in our groaning as we pray and he intercedes for us.

Romans 8:26 (King James Version)
Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

Romans 8:26 (Amplified Bible)
So too the [Holy] Spirit comes to our aid and bears us up in our weakness; for we do not know what prayer to offer nor how to offer it worthily as we ought, but the Spirit Himself goes to meet our supplication and pleads in our behalf with unspeakable yearnings and groanings too deep for utterance.

Romans 8:26-28 (The Message)
Meanwhile, the moment we get tired in the waiting, God's Spirit is right alongside helping us along. If we don't know how or what to pray, it doesn't matter. He does our praying in and for us, making prayer out of our wordless sighs, our aching groans. He knows us far better than we know ourselves, knows our pregnant condition, and keeps us present before God. That's why we can be so sure that every detail in our lives of love for God is worked into something good.

From this different Versions, it is evident that we and the Holy spirit are involved in this groaning/wordless sighs. This type of prayer is deep and cannot be explained fully enough. It's a point where we are in him praying and he is in us praying too but this time with one voice, with the Holy Spirit bringing out our earnest need to God. . But a question that pops out is, where do we draw a line between groaning and weeping? are this words synonymous? @ shahan and donnie please help me out. . I nor sabi english well.  But i know in groaning, shedding of tears is possible as in weeping.

I appreciate the understanding that a verse may not be readily offered for the idea of the weeping; and there are so many things that we believe which we may not evidently provide verses for to the point. However, I had hoped that donnie might have been able to offer some for his persuasion - which didn't happen.

In anycase, it seems rather obvious that the Holy Spirit's groaning does not translate into weeping with tears. There seems to be a very marked contrast between the two in Scripture (although you are not far wrong that in some other instances we may both groan and weep). An incident in John 11 might be of much help here -

"³³When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, He groaned in the spirit, and was troubled, ³⁴And said, Where have ye laid him? They said unto Him, Lord, come and see. ³⁵Jesus wept. ³⁶Then said the Jews, Behold how He loved him! ³⁷And some of them said, Could not this man, which opened the eyes of the blind, have caused that even this man should not have died? ³⁸Jesus therefore again groaning in Himself cometh to the grave. It was a cave, and a stone lay upon it."

When we carefully follow the narrative sequence, we find that while Mary and the Jews were "WEEPING", Jesus "GROANED" in the Spirit (vs. 33). The distinction is brought out in vs. 35 where Jesus "WEPT"; and then later on in vs. 38 Jesus GROANED again (rather than WEEP again).

"Groaning" in the Spirit is not the same thing as "weeping". Yes, I've wept in prayer a couple of times; but even then, I cannot take my own experience to be the same thing as the idea of the Spirit 'weeping'. I am still carefully studying the Word to see if there's any verse that might be remotely suggestive of a case of the Spirit Himself "weeping" - it's a hard case to establish, no doubt; but for all that, it appears Scripture does not teach that at all.

An akin word we often read of in Scripture is "CRY"; but we understand that it does not always involve tears as though one was "weeping". A few examples:

Matt. 3:3 - "For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight."

Matt. 9:27 - "And when Jesus departed thence, two blind men followed him, crying, and saying, Thou Son of David, have mercy on us."

Matt. 14:26 - "And when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were troubled, saying, It is a spirit; and they cried out for fear."

Psa. 5:2 - "Hearken unto the voice of my cry, my King, and my God: for unto thee will I pray."

Psa. 18:6 - "In my distress I called upon the LORD, and cried unto my God: he heard my voice out of his temple, and my cry came before him, even into his ears."

As in the latter text of Psa. 18:6, 'crying' in connection with prayer has nothing to do with 'weeping'. Rather, it is an expression that conveys the sense of strong and passionate praying - which is no different from the idea expressed in Rom. 8:26 about 'groaning' in the Spirit during prayer.

lysaa:

the references u gave goes ahead to explain what Donnie says as per the holy spirit being the Angel of His presence rather than the pre-incarnate ministry of Christ Jesus.

Isaiah 63:8-10 (King James Version)
For he said, Surely they are my people, children that will not lie: so he was their Saviour.

9In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old.

10But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit: therefore he was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them.

Isaiah 63:9-10 (The Message)
He said, "Without question these are my people,
  children who would never betray me."
So he became their Savior.
  In all their troubles,
  he was troubled, too.
He didn't send someone else to help them.
  He did it himself, in person.
Out of his own love and pity
  he redeemed them.
He rescued them and carried them along
  for a long, long time.
10But they turned on him;
  they grieved his Holy Spirit.
So he turned on them,
  became their enemy and fought them.

verse 10 shows us who this angel is; the Holy Spirit. And your other reference talks about this same angel that God gave to his people to lead them.

He is still that angel today. An angel means a messenger. He is the messenger of the presence of God.

It is hardly a balanced interpretation to suppose that the angel of the Lord's presence represents the Holy Spirit in Isa. 63:10. God's Spirit is never in Scripture spoken of as an "angel"; and the reference to the Holy Spirit in vs. 10 simply points out that the obstinacy of God's people grieves Him.

When you compare the texts I offered earlier, you will find that the same expression does not point to the Holy Spirit; but rather to the pre-incarnate Christ.

lysaa:

Stephen saw the Lord Jesus in a vision-Acts 7:56. Jesus is in heaven but the holy Ghost is the one here carrying God's presence from place to place. John 15:26 says he proceeds from the Father. He is the one that comes out from God to represent God where ever His name is mentioned in Faith, wherever God's people are gathered; church, home, conferences etc. And the most exciting of all -he appears in different places at the same time doing different works. He is here in/with me, he is there in/with u and where all God's people at right now and never diminishes i.e Thru his ministry, we experience the omnipresent power of God. This is the angel of his presence.

Like I said just above, the word angel is never used in reference to the Holy Spirit. It is simply human interpretation that draws this inference.

Regards.

@gbade. x,

Na wah for you sef!!
See how you reveal the very games I play!! When I'm beaten by my bro or sis, I sulk and switch over to Yahoo games (love ZUMA)!

@lysaa,
Well, I don't know of Scripture games as of now, but I heard a few guys are considering it with loads of innovations and animations as yet. When I come across the reference again, I'll update you. Cheers.

Just like I said earlier, even the proponents of the doctrine of annihilation are deeply disagreed among themselves on what they actually believe. Sample these:

Denials of Punishment by fire:

sage:

It was never Gods plan to put people into fire and will never be.

sage:

. . . and Jeremiah showsthat the loving God clearly has no intentions of putting his creation into fire, . . .

Affirmation of Punishment by Fire:

Bobbyaf:

The wicked. . .will be [color=990000]burned up until[/color] they will be ashes under the soles of your feet.

Bobbyaf:

Here we see without a moment's doubt that Satan will be devoured by God's specially prepared fire. Notice that Satan will become ashes, literally. Notice too that this fire shall start burning from within Satan.

Bobbyaf:

So emotionally and physically they are tormented for awhile until the fire does its work completely.

The problem many people have with reading issues in the Bible is simply that they cannot receive the divine declarations as stated. There has got to be a middle course somewhere that offers them a pivot for their supposed denials and re-interpretations.


@gbade. x

gbade. x:

Doesn't the word "eternal destruction" sound self-contradictory??

In retrospect, I was being facetious earlier. I believe the Bible mentions such concepts as 'everlasting destruction' (II Thes. 1:9), 'everlasting judgment' (Heb. 6:2), 'eternal damnation' (Mark 3:29); and 'everlasting punishment' (Matt. 25:46) - and in themselves they are not contradictory. This is not the case with sage's idea of "eternal annihilation" as annihilation is nowhere taught in Scripture.

Perhaps Bobbyaf did not quite catch the gist of those phrases, and had supposed they point to a limited time:

Bobbyaf:

So emotionally and physically they are tormented for awhile until the fire does its work completely.

Any careful reader of Revelation 20:10 will immediately notice how that verse is being denied by Bobbyaf's statement above. The Bible does not suggest at all that they are "tormented for a while until . . ." What the verse does say is that they "shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever!"

Does "day and night for ever and ever" sound like "a while until"?? What is the correlation between the two??

gbade. x:

Doesn't the word "eternal destruction" sound self-contradictory??

As does sage's "eternal annihilation".

@donnie,

donnie:

Someone asked me to show him from the bible where it says that the Holy Spirit weeps. I might not be able to show you in black and white but comparing scripture with scripture you will understand. In my experience, sometimes in prayer, i have heard him weep for the world for sinners and for the afflicted and sick. I also hear him weep if i ignore Him and go doing things my own way. The bible tells us that Jesus wept at the grave of Lazarus. And remember He had said, 'i do what i see my father do'. The bible also says about Jesus that He is touched with the feelings of our infirmity. The bible lets us know that the Holy Spirit can be grieved. It is not strange therefore to hear that that gentle Holy Spirit weeps in compassion with and over us since the three persons- father son and Holy ghost are one. Jesus is the express image of the father's person and the fullness of the God- head dwells in Him. He said, 'if you have seen me, you have seen the father.' If you would read Isaiah 63:7-9 it talks about the angel of His presence (which is the Holy Ghost) who carried the Israelites through the wilderness, protecting them. It says in verse 9 that 'in all their distresses, He too was distressed'. And as for whether i look like the Holy Spirit? My answer is in the words of John. He said, 'as He is, so are we in this World'. Do Jesus and the holy spirit look alike? Emphatically yes! So?

Please find my rejoinder in the new thread you opened: Re: Pentecostalism and Christianity.

@TV01,

Let me help you a bit more.

TV01:

Whilst continuing in my daily study meditation, lot's of scriptures have been speaking to me very deeply on this and I must confess that I am been led even more towards eternal destruction as opposed to eternal torment.

What exactly is meant by "eternal destruction" and "eternal torment"? I think most people who have a problem with Revelation 20:10 easily accept the annihilation/destruction doctrine without a moment's consideration for the "torment" in that verse.

TV01:

One thing I had never thought about much was the immortality of the soul. This is sounding less and less like a Christian notion the more I read.

I can understand why people feel the way you do on this. In just the same way, there's no such teaching in the Bible as annihilation.

TV01:

I think "immortality of the soul" is core to the doctrine of eternal torment but It's something worth claryfing in it's own right.

Aye.

TV01:

I think scripture talks about immortality as something to come, not something we already have, as I believe the following scriptures all attest to;

Romans 2:7 - eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;

1 Corinthians 15:53 - For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54 - So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: "Death is swallowed up in victory."

1Timothy 6:16 - who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see, to whom be honor and everlasting power. Amen.

2 Timothy 1:10 - but has now been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ, who has abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel,

It all depends on what you understand those verses to be pointing to or implying by immortality.

TV01:

I see nothing that can even remotely be read as eternal torment before the Revelations 20:10.

I'll urge you to keep reading and perhaps you might see that more than being mentioned 'remotely', the Lord Jesus categorically made it clear that there's such a thing as eternal torment:

Matt. 25:41 & 46 - "Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. . .And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal."

Mark 9:43-44 - "And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched. Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."

Luke 16:23-24 - "And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame."

TV01:

Do hell and death burn forever as well?

Do you remember that Death and Hell were personified in Rev. 6:8? "And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth."

TV01:

I am not convinced that death is meant to mean anything other than cessation of life. Whilst I accept that death is on occasion used figuratively in scripture, I don't think it's import is such in relation to eternal judgement.

Perhaps the reason for such a position is borne out of an unwillingness to look into the clear statements in the Revelation verses. The passages there do NOT teach "cessation of life" as long as those cast into the lake of fire experience "torment".

TV01:

Likewise attempting to pass of eternal life and/or everlasting life as not being about life (immortality?) per se, but about the quality of that life, is to me as tenuous an arguement as the one about death.

Aye.

TV01:

Also with regards to Jude 7, I think this speaks even more to eternal destruction as opposed to eternal torment when read in conjunction with 2 Peter 2:6.

2 Peter 2:6 - and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly;

Jude 1:7 - as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

I think this clearly outlines the fact that it was the finality (irrevocability) and means (unquenchable fire) of the judgment that were eternal in nature and not the actual length of the judgment itself. Which of course was death (destruction, perishing, consuming).

The one question I would like to ask about this idea that Jude 7 points to finality of judgement: Will the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah escape the FINAL Judgement in Revelation 20:12-13?

@donnie,

There was absolutely no need to open a new thread just to answer an enquiry where doing so in the existing thread would have saved the day. Now to the gist of your post:

donnie:

Someone asked me to show him from the bible where it says that the Holy Spirit weeps. I might not be able to show you in black and white but comparing scripture with scripture you will understand. In my experience, while in prayer, i have heard him weep for the world, for sinners and for the afflicted and sick.

I won't try to disparage your experience; but I would rather be persuaded by the Word of God than taking anyone's experiences for it. We live in a day when people tnd to magnify their own experiences over Scripture; and I trust you're not one of them.

Nonetheless, we read of the various passions of the Holy Spirit in a number of verses. He can be grieved (Eph. 4:30); lied to (Acts 5:3-5); and bears/helps with our infirmities (Rom. 8:26). But nowhere does Scripture give us the picture of Him weeping.

donnie:

I sometimes hear him weep when i ignore Him and go doing things my own way. The bible tells us that Jesus wept at the grave of Lazarus. And remember He had said, 'i do what i see my father do'.

This is simply pushing humanistic ideas. So, Jesus' weeping at the grave of Lazarus meant that the Father was also weeping? Are we to take it then that when Jesus cried "with a loud voice" on the Cross, the Father was also crying with a loud voice as well? Or, that when Jesus was hungry (Matt. 21:18) the father was also hungry?

You really don't push this idea willy-nilly and make them up supposedly from the Bible.

donnie:

The bible also says about Jesus that He is touched with the feelings of our infirmity. The bible lets us know that the Holy Spirit can be grieved. It is not strange therefore to hear that that gentle Holy Spirit weeps in compassion with and over us since the three persons- father son and Holy ghost are one.

The Holy Spirit does not weep - it is men that have supposed He does.

donnie:

Jesus is the express image of the father's person and the fullness of the God- head dwells in Him. He said, 'if you have seen me, you have seen the father.' If you would read Isaiah 63:7-9 it talks about the angel of His presence (which is the Holy Ghost) who carried the Israelites through the wilderness, protecting them.

The angel of His presence is rather the Lord Jesus Christ in His pre-incarnate ministry. You can read the following verses for cross-reference and verification: Exodus 23:20; 32:34; 33:2; and Num. 20:16.

donnie:

It says in verse 9 that 'in all their distresses, He too was distressed.' So He does express such emotions.

That cannot be stretched to mean that the Holy Spirit weeps.

donnie:

And as for whether i look like the Holy Spirit? My answer is in the words of John. He said, 'as He is, so are we in this World'. Do Jesus and the holy spirit look alike? Emphatically yes! So?

By taking John's statement out of context, you have cleverly arrived at something different from the intended meaning in I John 4:17. Study it carefully - perhaps you will see just how you short-changed yourself.

@Backslider,

Backslider:

I will ask you one last Question and I will not say about this no more.

IF GOD SINNED WHO OR WHAT WILL JUDGE HIM? YOU? hmmmmmmmm

IF I ALLOW MY SON ( I HAVE ONE) TO BE PUNISHED FOR THE SIN OF HIS JUNIOR BROTHER SO THAT HIS JUNIOR MIGHT BE JUSTIFIED.

AM I JUST?



*GOD IS JUST BECAUSE HE HAD MADE US RIGHTEOUS BY THE DEATH OF JESUS
* BY LAW OF THE JEWS GOD IS NOT JUST BECAUSE HE ALLOWED HIS SON TO DIE , BUT WHO THEN WILL JUDGE GOD. NOTHING AND NO MAN

Let me make this very clear GOD IS RIGHTEOUS AND THERE IS NO SIN IN HIM. YOU MUST KNOW THAT WHEN JESUS SPOKE HE QUOTED HIS SAYING SO THAT NOT ALL WOULD UNDERSTAND.

IF YOU READ JESUS HE TOLD HIS DISCIPLES TO EAT HIS FLESH AND DRINK HIS BLOOD> WHAT DOES THIS MEANS THIS?

YOU SEE YOU ARE FINDING DIFFICULT TO EXPLAIN TO SOMEONE ON THE OTHER POST THAT DEATH AND (HELL) WERE CAST IN THE LAKE OF FIRE.

HE ACCUSSED YOU OF BEING A WHAT,

I have made my case.

I am Justified by the sin offering.

THAT IS WHY IN JESUS WE ARE JUSTIFIED BY JESUS ALONE AND NO OTHER BECAUSE HE IS SINLESS

IT IS IRONIC THAT I HAVE BEEN EXPOUNDING OF THE LOVE OF GOD YET YOU HAVE NOT SEEN. THAT IS WHY BY LAW WE ARE CONDEMNED SO WE RECEIVED JUSTIFICATION IN CHRIST BY LOVE OF GOD SHED IN OUR HEARTS FOR THE FATHER ALLOWED HIS RIGHTEOUS SON TO BREAK THE LAW SO THAT THE LAW WILL HAVE NO EFFECT YET THE LAW WAS FUFILED IN RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD.

MAY GOD GIVE YOU UNDERSTAND

Where have you answered my questions? Here again:

#1. If "God sinned", then where is your holy God?

#2. If "God sinned", then who died to save your God from His own sins?

#3. If you must push this idea, where is it written that "God sinned"?

If you may, please post the verses and let all arguements cease thereto.

lysaa:

Calling the Holy spirit a dove is reducing his person to common creature. He could move like a wind, burn like fire descend in the form of dove but he is non of these.

Which tesselates with:

shahan:

The Holy Ghost is neither a dove nor a cloud (however mighty that may be). He is NOT what you make Him out to be

Simply put: the Holy Spirit is God - and there's nothing and no one comparable to Him.

@Backslider,

You don't present a basis for strong faith by making a heretical statement that "GOD SINNED". That is nowhere taught in the Bible, and your latest efforts are not helping your arguments at all.

#1. If "God sinned", then where is your holy God?

#2. If "God sinned", then who died to save your God from His own sins?

#3. If you must push this idea, where is it written that "God sinned"?

Please don't labour to give me your ideas because no verse can be adduced to buttress your heresy. If your "God sinned", good for you - but the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is WITHOUT sin, and that is my faith.

@abdkabir,

Your rejoinder may well be suited to Islamic thinking, but it does not answer my question. Thanks all the same.

@Backslider,

Backslider:

I will now go into the DARK deep saying of the Almighty and I want you to get the revelation. please

I don't want to lead you on into what you suppose is "the DARK deep saying of the Almighty", for you have posted something more akin to heresy than the precious Word of God. This is how:

Backslider:

. . . GOD WAS ACCURSED ON THE TREE. . . WHEN HE DIED HE WAS CHAINED TO HELL. . .

. . . DID GOD NOT SIN? YES HE DID, IN THAT HE ALLOWED HIS SON TO DIE. . .

YES GOD SINNED THIS IS THE SIN THAT GOD COMMITTED SO THAT WE COULD HAVE RIGHTEOUSNESS. . .

. . . SOME THINK THAT JESUS WENT TO HELL AS A CONQUEROR NO WAY BIG LIE HE WAS [b]CHAINED AND CARRIED TO HELL

. . . THIS IS THE SIN THAT GOD COMMITTED BECAUSE OF HIS LOVE FOR MAN.

None of these heresies you have espoused are taught anywhere in the Bible; so I advise that you don't run ahead into notions of your own engineering while fancifully supposing that you're deep in the things of God.

Meanwhile, we began with distingushing between ANGER and HATRED; and you have left that now and run into the latest.

The God I worship NEVER committed ANY sin; and anyone reading this should know that shahan does NOT espouse even one line of Backslider's views here.

Hi @donnie,

Let me draw attention to something in your posts:

donnie:

Where did the teaching of using the DOVE symbol to represent the Holy Spirit come from. It does not matter for how long this teaching has been, it has to leave the church.

Now that is quite queer. You should have known it came from the Bible itself    See am:

Matt 3:16 - "And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him."

Mark 1:10
"And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him."

Luke 3:22
"And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased."

John 1:32
"And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him."

donnie:

The Holy Ghost is not a dove and does not resemble a dove.

Partly true - He is NOT a dove but was pleased to have come in bodily shape like a dove.

donnie:

The Holy Spirit looks just like YOU (if you're a christian) for He looks like Jesus the one whom you were born after.

This contradicts what you later posted quoting Exo. 20:4 ~~

donnie:

Are you aware that the Holy Spirit is God Himself?
Take a look at this:

Exodus 20:4
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

The Holy Spirit does NOT look just like you! He is pleased to reveal Himself in the various ways that He chose - and that goes far beyond gender or limitations. We are made in the image of God does not mean that God is like a man!

Further, while it has been easier for you to categorically denounce the understanding that the Holy Spirit descended in bodily shape like a dove; you made a few slips in referring to Him as a cloud --

donnie:

If you only knew that He was the forth man in the fire with the three Hebrew Children. If you only knew that He was that mighty cloud that followed the Isrealites by day and that pillar of fire that gave them light by night.  The one who blew over the red sea dividing it and holding it up until over 6 million Jews went across; You will not call Him a gentle dove(as some do call him).

So, where do you begin to draw the lines between others' idea that "the Holy Spirit IS a dove" and your own teaching that "He WAS that mighty cloud"? The Holy Ghost is neither a dove nor a cloud (however mighty that may be). He is NOT what you make Him out to be, donnie!

I would be grateful if you can show me from Scripture where it is written that the Holy Spirit WEEPS, as you said earlier:

donnie:

The Holy Ghost is not fire, oil or smoke. He is Himself God. He looks, loves, laughs, weeps, heals, prays, comforts, provides, teaches etc like Jesus.

@Backslider,

Backslider:

@SHAHAN
THIS PASSAGE TELL US HOW KING AHAB WAS LOOKING THE PROPHESY OF PROSPERITY AND VICTORY (we have this nowadays) HE WANT PROPHETS THAT PROPHESIED WHAT HE WANT TO HERE.

THIS PEOPLE WANT YOU TO TELL THEM THAT THERE IS NO HELL OR HELL FIRE. THIS ARE THE TIMES PEOPLE WILL QUESTION GOD EXISTENCE WITH GREAT REBELION.

WE ARE NOT IN THE GOOD DAYS OF PURE CHRISTIANITY.

Thanks Backslider. I can relate with what you have stated - and believe me, there are more shocking denials made today by a lot of people within the Christian Church.

Backslider:

I DON'T CARE IF THERE IS A HEAVEN OR NOT BUT I KNOW I WANT TO BE IN THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST FOR ETERNITY.

I think you should care enough to know that there IS a heaven - for being with Jesus does not mean much without caring about WHERE it is we shall be with Him.

@Backslider,

This argument can go on forever if we fail to see the point of the verses we quote. But here, let me offer this again:

Backslider:

Anger is hatred for sinners this is one of the Attributes of God if not there will be no hell.

If ANGER is the same thing as HATRED, then I suppose from your perspective the Bible actually meant that believers can also HATE their brethren according to I John 3:15 ~~ "Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him."

Is hating your brother the same thing as being angry with your brother? Read Eph 4:26 ~~ "Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath."

From all indications, it is obvious you're mixing up the two and unable to distinguish the one from the other.

Backslider:

The hatred and Love for Sin and sinner is the heart of God.

I think you have just contradicted all your earlier arguments. Let me break it down: How can God both have "hatred and Love for Sin and sinner" if originally you have been arguing for His hatred for sin and sinner all this while? To me, that sounds like you're espousing the idea that God loves what He hates at the same time - which is nowhere taught in Scripture!! And I suppose in all honesty that would not be your point.

Backslider:

I will ask you a question when a sinner dies and is infront of God does God accept him in Heaven?

And I will repeat my answer as given earlier:

shahan:

The UN[/b]repentant sinner who dies in his/her sins will go to hell ~~ "I tell you, Nay: but, [b]except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish" (Luke 13:3 & 5; see also Rev. 21:8).

gbade. x:

Sunday's all good. School's still Sept. (some crap-ass calendar shuffling they are doing). Just lazying @ home, watching cartoons, gaming hard and emm. . .watching Teletubbies

Lol. . . you have revealed my secret - agbaya like me loves to watch cartoons and play video games as well. . . and we thought they were made just for "kids!" Enjoy o jare!

Backslider:

JESUS CONDEMNS SIN AND SINNERS

Okay brotherly. . . we appreciate your persuasions on this matter. Love of Christ be with you without condemnation!

@Backslider,

Thank you again for your response. Let me try and share the difference in Psalm 7:11 - "God judgeth the righteous, and God is angry with the wicked every day."

You will notice that the verse did NOT say that God "hates" the wicked/sinner; but rather that He is "angry" with them. To hate and to be angry are two very different things. Even though God is angry with the wicked (such as we all have been even before we believed in Jesus Christ), He still loved them enough to send His Son Jesus Christ to redeem them: "And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath He reconciled" (Col. 1:21).

Now, God may be angry with the wicked or the sinner; but Psalm 7:11 does not mean that He hates them. In just the same way, believers can be angry (Eph. 4:26); but we as believers cannot hate the brethren (I John 3:15 and 4:20). These are two very different things.

Backslider:

MY REASON FOR QOUTING THIS IS NOT TO SAY THAT GOD HATES SINNER AND THERE IS NO LOVE IN GOD BUT THE FACT IS THAT THE PEOPLE OF GOD ARE NOT AWARE OF GODS ANGER AT SIN AND SINNER READ BELOW.

Okay, at least you acquiesce that God does not hate the sinner - if that's what you meant to say.

Backslider:

THE ABOVE VERSE SAYS CATEGORICALLY THAT WHEN A SINNER WAKES UP THERE IS ANGER AGAINST HIM FROM A LOVING GOD!

I don't think that idea is sustained in Scripture. Rather, when a sinner wakes up, the love of God is still being offered even though God is angry with the wicked:

"For his anger endureth but a moment; in his favour is life: weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning." (Psalm 30:5); and, again: "Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?" (Rom. 2:4).

If there is anger to a sinner every morning, where's the love that leads him/her to repentance? One cannot use Psalm 7:11 as a blanket statement to preach anger of God everyday to sinners; for there were times in the same book of Psalms that God had been angry towards His own people for their sins ~~ "O God, why hast thou cast us off for ever? why doth thine anger smoke against the sheep of thy pasture?" (Psa. 74:1).

God does not HATE people simply because He is ANGRY with the wicked.

Backslider:

I WILL ASK A QUESTION WHO GOES TO HELL SIN OR SINNERS?

The UN[/b]repentant sinner who dies in his/her sins will go to hell ~~ "I tell you, Nay: but, [b]except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish" (Luke 13:3 & 5; see also Rev. 21:8).

Cheers.

mukina2:

there is no God but Allah and MUhammad (saw) his messenger

Now this is interesting - long awaited. May I ask if this "Allah" is the same God that the Biblical prophets knew as the LORD God of Israel?

@gbade. x,

Brotherly. . . Lol. I just dey. Been busy the past few weeks - from holiday to school. Fortunately, acada outside Naija is not as stressful (unless you be lawyer like my sista!) 

Sunday has been beautiful so far - I'm going back in the p.m. for another service to honour a friend's invitation at theirs. And you??

gbade. x:

Jesus can't be the Redeemer and The Condemner at the same time.

I'll have to agree with you; although I agree as well with the persuasion of Backslider in the sense that the UN[/b]repentant stands condemned, and not the repentant/penitent.

It's hard for people to make the distinction between Jesus as the [b]Saviour NOW and as the Judge in the FUTURE. I'm still learning and growing; but I'm presently persuaded that the judgement is yet future as in I Cor. 4:5 ~ "Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God."

The UN[/b]repentant do not stand condemned before God IMMEDIATELY after commiting a sin (except the blasphemy of the Holy Ghost). If that were the case, perhaps the one we know as the apostle Paul would have long been smoked out the first time he rejected Jesus as the Messiah and consequently sought to persecute the Church. He confessed that, "Christ Jesus came into the world to save [b]sinners; of whom I am chief" (I Tim. 1:15). Did the Lord Jesus condemn Paul as the chief sinner? I'm rather persuaded otherwise.

Instead, Paul was to rejoice in the very next verse by saying: "Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on Him to life everlasting." (verse 16)

May we have the grace to see and apply this pattern of the redeeming love of Jesus Christ to those He seeks to save rather than condemn.

@Backslider,

Thanks for recommending the book posted - and I'll take time to read it through.

Indeed, we should be committed to warning everyone of the aweful judgement that will befall the wicked; and as far as the topic of this thread goes, we all are attempting to explicate the nature of the final judgement, as not many people understand the subject of eternal judgement.

On the other hand, I believe that the salvation which the Lord Jesus offers is all-inclusive. People are not saved in order to live desolate lives or wallow in penury. A good church is sine qua non to the spiritual growth of believers as she seeks the well-being of her members.

Yet, I would have to agree with you that material prosperity is NOT the ticket to heaven. What saves a person is faith in Jesus Christ and His finished work; and there is NO other Name whereby people must be saved (Acts 4:12).

"For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." [Rom. 8:3-4]

"Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh. Grudge not one against another, brethren, lest ye be condemned: behold, the judge standeth before the door." [James 5:8-9]

Points have been made, and on most count we have been saying the same thing: only the UN[/b]repentant and rebellious stand condemned before God - and I also stated that earlier:

shahan:

[b]Certainly, I remember that the evangelist is never quite done with his/her task until he/she informs the sinner of the aweful judgement of God upon the unrepentant and rebellious. Yet, God sets His love before the sinner as the most important factor in saving us, than anything else.