Results 21 - 40 of 911
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: gracefull Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | What did Martin Luther believe? | Acts 2:25 | gracefull | 95310 | ||
Hi John, Thank you for the post..I gathered as much from the full document. Please re read Hank's post copied into mine to get the history behind this post. The point of the post... Erasmus's reference to Martin Luther's quote was the main text. His response, however, is identical to the response received by myself and others who questioned this teaching... The point of the post is that the teaching that Jesus died as a sinner, bearing our sin judgement-not His own, and paid our sin debt is as old as Martin Luther,(most likely much older) and not new, originating in the early 1900's (through a vision?) as has been previously stated. God bless |
||||||
22 | What did Martin Luther believe? | Acts 2:25 | gracefull | 95295 | ||
Gracefull: To believe that Christ bore man's sin on the cross is fully scriptural. But it is neither a small step nor does it point the way to believing that Christ suffered in hell for three days. It is no small step as you say; it is a giant leap, an heretical leap, that Scripture does not support nor did Martin Luther. WOF teaching on this subject is egregious error, it is blatantly false, it is wholly unorthodox, it is heresy of the first rank. Your quotations of Martin Luther, if they are, as they appear, designed to make Luther seem to be a forerunner of the Word Faith Movement, fall light years short of the mark, and your efforts to drag Luther into the WOF camp fall flat on their face. You are not going to be able to prove WOF teachings by Scripture, or by the Reformers, or by anyone else who adheres to Christian orthodoxy. The only people on the planet who buy into the WOF lies are those who have already been deceived by them or who are so ill versed in Scripture that they are vulnerable to them and are taken this false teaching. Jesus said on the cross, and He said it plainly, "It is finished." And Jesus never uttered a word that He didn't mean. --Hank Please see this web site for the complete document. http://ic.net/(squigly line)erasmus/RAZ499.HTM "Ancient Christian Commentary (general editor Thomas C. Oden, Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1998 - ):" "Given these sentiments, it should not surprise us that Luther frequently contradicts himself, as well as Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition. He even blasphemes Jesus by claiming that our Lord offered to be consigned to hell for us (as if it is possible for God the Son to be eternally separated from God the Father -- this is impossible to even consider as any sort of potentiality at all): He found Himself in a state of condemnation and abandonment . . . He actually and in truth offered Himself to the eternal Father to be consigned to eternal damnation for us. His human nature did not behave differently from that of a man who is to be condemned eternally to hell. On account of this love of God, God at once raised Him from death and hell, and so He overcame hell. [Grisar, ibid., vol. 1, 239-240; from Commentary on Romans (1515-1516); edition of J. Ficker, Leipzig: 1908, 218 ff.) But Christ took upon Himself all of our sin, and thus He died upon the cross. Therefore he had to become that which we are, namely a sinner, a murderer, evildoer, etc. . . . For insofar as he is a victim for the sins of the whole world, He is not now such a person as is innocent and without sin, is not God's Son in all glory, but a sinner, abandoned by God for a short time; Psalms 8:6. [Detailed Explanation of the Epistle to the Galatians, part 2, fourth argument, Walch edition, vol. 8, p. 2165, nos. 321-324; cf. Commentary on Galatians, tr Erasmus Middleton, ed. J.P. Fallowes, London: 1850; reprinted by Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, MI, 1979, 164-165] This is heresy. Jesus (being God incarnate) cannot cease to be holy at any time, nor can he be a "sinner" -- not even on the cross. But Luther goes on and on in this line of thinking: " I truly mean this Hank Thank you for challenging me to continue to check my facts. Again ,this is simply to point out that this teaching did not 'originate' with WOF teachers... This should also challenge those who believe this teaching originated with a vision? Apparently this teaching goes back at least as far as the late 1500's existed. God bless |
||||||
23 | GOD TURNED HIS BACK ON JESUS WHEN JESUS | Bible general Archive 2 | gracefull | 94784 | ||
Hi Ray... And in this statement lies the mystery! That God could become sin for us and be forsaken...Not whether He was forsaken or not. "I see a holy God who was numbered with the transgressors and for a brief moment (see Isaiah 54:7) felt the forsaking that a man would feel. But He remained the Son of Man, even the Man crying out "My (God), My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?" Matthew 27:46." God bless |
||||||
24 | What was Jesus doing in the earth 3 days | Matthew | gracefull | 94750 | ||
'Answer: 'Moreover, in her 1991 booklet, [Joyce] Meyer asserts that salvation is impossible without believing Jesus suffered in hell as the believer’s substitute. Meyer writes, “There is no hope of anyone going to heaven unless they believe this truth I am presenting. You cannot go to heaven unless you believe with all your heart that Jesus took your place in hell.” If one believes Jesus died in their place, one either believes His death on the cross was all there was to the atonement and that after that He was in 'Paradise' waiting for the resurrection, OR that Jesus paid the full price of the sinner by becoming a sinner by taking on the sins of mankind. This seems to be the main starting point of division...There seems to be the idea that Jesus becoming a sinner on the cross in our place is original to WOF teachers. I would like to offer the following information to prove that Jesus becoming a sinner on the cross in our place is NOT an anti 'orthodox theology'. FYI This teaching did not originate with WOF. And I doubt it originated here...but it goes back at least to the 16th Century. Martin Luther 'Commentary on Galatians (Grand Rapids, MI Kregal Publications), edited by John Price Fallowes, M.A. Galatians 3:13-14 "And this, no doubt, all the prophets did forsee in spirit, that Christ should be accounted the greatest transgressor that could be, having all the sins imputed to Him. For He being made a sacrifice for sin, yea for the sins of the whole world, is not now the Son of God born of the virgin Mary, but a sinner who hathand carrieth the sin of Paul, who was a blasphemer and a persecutor; of Peter who denied Him; of David who was an adulterer and a murderer; and briefly, who hath and beareth all the sins of all men in His body;not that He is Himself guilty of any, but that He received them, being committed or done by us, and laid uponHis body, that He might make satisfaction for them with Hisown blood(Isa.53:5) Martin Luther goes on to say; "But some men will say, it is absurd and slanderous to call the Son of God a cursed sinner. I answer, if thou be wilt deny Him to be a sinner and accursed, deny also that He was crucified and dead. For it is no less absurd to say that the Son of God (as our faith professesth and believeth) was crucified and suffered the pains of sin and death, than to say that He is a sinner and accursed. But if it be not absurd to confess and believe that Christ was crucified between two thieves, then it is absurd to say also that He was accursed, and of all sinners the greatest." Martin Luther indicates here that he believes Jesus became 'a sinner' upon the cross...and that unless one acknowledges this, one should also deny that He was crucified and dead. My English grammer interprets this as 'If you deny He became a sinner you must also deny that He was crucified. The two are inseperable.' And he taught this in the 16th Century. Now this does not state that Jesus went to Hell, but it clearly states that Martin Luther believed Jesus literaly became accursed for us. He goes so far as to call Him the 'of all sinners the greatest.' As I stated in another post some time back, he also interpreted scripture to say God turned from God. He pronounced it a great mystery...but none the less acknowledged it. This was long before WOF teachers started teaching it, and my guess is Martin Luther would be considered an Orthodox theologian.. Jesus did not just die physically for our sins..but BECAME SIN for us. To believe this is scriptural, is only a very small step to believing Jesus went to Hell. God bless |
||||||
25 | What constitutes 'abuse' on the forum? | Acts 17:11 | gracefull | 94724 | ||
"Isn't that the definition of a cult, a group that claims superior knowledge, revelation or understanding over the rest of Christiandom?" Maybe, I do not specialize in 'cult hunting'. My statement does not claim superior knowledge to the rest of Christiandom. I claim the right to believe SCRIPTURE as revealed by the Holy Spirit ABOVE the established 'orthodox theology'. Please notice I did not SAY what you SAID that WOF claims superior knowledge.... I SAID, " "The problem IS, you can't prove your position because you can't listen without emotions and attitude getting in the way,". Did I say I have superior knowledge? No, I said "attitude and emotions are getting in the way of your(Darcy and you Ed) being able to PRESENT a clear explanation to the contray..." Did I say the position I took was CORRECT and yours was INCORRECT? No, I said you can't present a clear POSITION TO THE CONTRARY. And that WOF believers study opposing views without fear, thus the term Bereans. In plain English, the previous restricted thread ended with me presenting a position for discussion and both you and Darcy exiting abruptly behind your 'theological position'. This does not produce a good Bible study atmosphere for GROWTH. If you truly believe WOF is so terribly bad, you should work harder at proving it wrong scripturally. Your posts of animosity against the teaching and teachers and sarcasm does nothing but gender strife and create an insecure environment for study. What student is going to ask hard questions when they FEAR ridicule and rejection? I hope the other members of the forum get the courage to discourge sternly such behaviour in the future. Otherwise people who really need guidance will not remain here. Only the easy ones who are agreeable will remain. Knowledge of the person and will of God is readily available to ALL Christians in personal relationship with God. Please read my EXIT statement for a better understanding of this statement. God bless |
||||||
26 | Providing with Life Assurance-Biblical? | Bible general Archive 2 | gracefull | 94636 | ||
Hi Harry...Read Numbers 27 and see if that helps. Number's 27 addresses the process for which the inheritance of a deceased man should be distributed. These verses indicate that a man should leave an inheritance for his family. This inheritance is HIS accumilated wealth. Life insurance was not available back then but men gathered for their children. And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a man die, and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter. Notice the verse does not say IF he has an inheritance..men were expected to have an inheritance. God bless |
||||||
27 | What constitutes 'abuse' on the forum? | Acts 17:11 | gracefull | 94633 | ||
"As goes for a Bible study on this issue it is impossible because the Hell doctrine isn't in the bible nor doesn't it even remotely hints at it. How can we have a biblical discussion when it is not in the Holy Bible. And the Book of Copeland is not found in there uncluding his revelation he got when messagers visited Him." The problem IS, you can't prove your position because you can't listen without emotions and attitude getting in the way, and your attitude prevents you from being able to present a clear Biblical explanation to the contrary... And they CAN...We are not fearful to hear but rather trust the Holy Spirit to lead us. WOF are excellent Bereans because they value the Word of God above theology and church doctrines. God bless |
||||||
28 | What constitutes 'abuse' on the forum? | Acts 17:11 | gracefull | 94629 | ||
Hi Darcy, I must admit I have no inclination to finish reading your post beyond your statement... "You claim that you were being stalked. Odviously you did not read mine. Ed was 'stalking'. "All any of us were doing was going against the hell doctrine that WOF leaders use." Then where was the Biblical discussion to the apologetic I posted? As I asked Ed, if your heart is to reach these poor misled souls and you can't even respond in a Christian manner to the teaching how can you help them? Your expectations that anyone is going to listen to ridicule and opinions such as the one you stated here, which totally ignores what Psalm 22 actually says by the way, and claims that their beliefs are simply unorthodox. WOF people are extremely scripture bound and your opinions and brash comments will not phase them. To them you are simply a Pharasee protecting your doctrines. Maybe you are convinced your posts disproved something scripturally, but to a WOF believer you have shot out a few scriptures then resorted to personal attacks to make your case. Apparently proving how much you hate WOF teaching is more important to you (You as in several of you) than actually having a Christian Bible study with the presence of patience and mutual respect as human beings and as children of God. The apologetic I posted may not have convinced anyone, but your responses sure did not convince anyone otherwise. Your responses were, in essence...I don't believe that, I believe this and your belief is heresy..maybe you could be convinced by that argument but WOF believers will not be. I perceive that there is a lot of fear on this forum against the teachings. Otherwise you folks would not have so much trouble discussing them.. By the way, I noticed the same response to anyone whose beliefs do not conform. I suggest you guys will get a lot more out of the forum if you actually get involved in the studies without all the opinions and animosity. Even if you are right you will find your faith in your beliefs strengthened by the challenge. I will not be posting to the forum for awhile. I may still read to observe if anyone here actually LEARNED anything about how a Bible study should actually be conducted. Or if you will harden your hearts and not hear... God bless |
||||||
29 | What constitutes 'abuse' on the forum? | Acts 17:11 | gracefull | 94594 | ||
"When faced with overwhelming evidence that the position you support is non scriptural you repeatedly ignore it and keep voicing it." Then you said...Both Radioman2 and I have repeatedly posted rebuttals providing scripture showing you where this teaching is heresy and you ignore and post a three part lesson on Hades that contained the points we had already discussed and did not support your position Biblically at all." ACTUALLY as soon as I did post a scriptural apologetic discussing my position, after repeated requests from you I might add, the thread was restricted and you refused to discuss it. Let's look at the event just prior to the thread being restricted... When I left you and began answering other's who had questions or responses you pursued me... Actually, the foundation calls it 'stalking'. You posted this to my post to someone else... So why are you going out in this direction or are you trying to deflect the standing questions?? You have been asked to take the posted comments of Copeland's and biblically show them to be correct. Or you are asked to admit Copleand has taught heresy. EdB Then you posted this to a post to someone else... graceful Then you posted this to a post I directed to someon else... Once again it does not say Jesus was tortured by Satan EdB To which I responded with the three part apologetic which seemed to be a good basis for an intellegent Biblical discussion...What happened? At which time I posted the apologetics for your comments…(In response to your ‘stalking’ which IS actually discouraged by the Foundation). Now Ed, was it my insistence to defend WOF that prompted the apologetic?..No. It was your persistent challenge to produce some scriptural basis for the teaching of Jesus suffering in Hell. You don’t see a problem with this? No one sees a problem with this? Because of the hardness of your hearts. You demand a scriptural discussion and then refuse to actually have a scriptural discussion. Matthew 11:16 But whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto children sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows, 17 And saying, We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned unto you, and ye have not lamented. I submit that regardless of whether my position is correct or not, you refuse to hear. Ed, your heart is hardened and that makes you unteachable and bitter. God bless |
||||||
30 | What constitutes 'abuse' on the forum? | Acts 17:11 | gracefull | 94588 | ||
Thank you Jeff.. God bless |
||||||
31 | What constitutes 'abuse' on the forum? | Acts 17:11 | gracefull | 94587 | ||
Makarios, Thank you for your response. "Any post on this form that puts our Lord's name in the same sentence with "emanicipated wormy spirit" is not a worthy post to be added to this Forum's literature, and it has justly been dealt with." I only have one problem with your statement.... This was not my post. This was not the topic of the thread. The actual post that posted this quote was NOT banned. If you look at my post that seemingly prompted the 'abuse' charge..The post was an apologetic DISCUSSING the topic of Jesus descending to Hell, and not the post radioman2 posted regarding statements made by Kenneth Copeland. Ed asked me to address the question of whether Jesus 'suffered in Hell' or not. I did not post the quotes by specific WOF teachers. But rather continually requested a scriptural discussion of the topic at hand. Did you read MY post that prompted the 'abuse' charge? Was the offending statement in any of my posts? No. "Any post on this form that puts our Lord's name in the same sentence with "emanicipated wormy spirit" is not a worthy post to be added to this Forum's literature, and it has justly been dealt with." Then MY posts should not have been the one banned... God bless |
||||||
32 | What constitutes 'abuse' on the forum? | Acts 17:11 | gracefull | 94499 | ||
It has come to my attention that threads are restricted when a forum member 'reports abuse'. I would like all forum members to clarify the term abuse. In the thread 93133 several MEMBER CONDUCT rules were violated BEFORE my post. Then after much proding, I posted a portion of an apologetic that offered scriptural interpretation and commentaries from men of different affiliations, for discussion and someone THEN decided to declare 'abuse'.Please remember that disagreement does not constitute divisive... Did my posts constitute abuse? Posting a paper for discussion that is scripturally based though in disagreement with the commonly accepted theology? Isn't this forum a Bible Study forum? This thread was suddenly considered 'abuse' because... 1. You were affraid of the challenge. 2. You feel that if you do not agree you have the right to 'pass judgement'. I wonder what would happen to the forum if everytime someone posted something someone else did not agree with, abuse was reported? The forum would become a 'dead sea' and die. Is that what the rest of the forum members want? I would like very much for other forum members to respond to this post and voice their opinion..should a forum member be allowed to 'report abuse' simply because their beliefs differ or because they do not like the discussion? God bless Ps the thread # was 93133 and my posts were # 94397, 94403, and 94404 for any who may not have been involved in the discussion. If you check out my post and find that it does not have adequate scripture for a forum discussion or is written in a divisive manner, let me know. Remember, disagreement does not constitute divisive. If it did, the forum should shut it's doors now. God bless |
||||||
33 | Sola Scriptura-A False teaching | 2 Tim 3:16 | gracefull | 94494 | ||
Once upon a time...surely you don't really believe this stuff? This is what fairy tales are made of! Excellent Berean statement! Is there no love to prompt you to reach out? Acts 17:10-12 10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. 12 Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few. 1.What prompts us to ridicule and mock the belief of others? It is NOT Godly love. Jesus died for those we mock. 2.Does our mocking promote trust among those we need to teach? 3.Are we mocking what they believe and not them? No...we cannot. Our beliefs are what make us who we are. They are what gives us a sense of purpose. 4.Does mocking the beliefs of others solidify our own beliefs? No, sharing and revisiting our beliefs and the source of our beliefs so as not to let them slip solidifies our beliefs and also leaves us open for correction and teachable. Considering these points, I see no valid reason for such a disgraceful response to someone God may have led to this forum for guidance or maybe even, God forbid, to teach US something. Matthew 7:12 12 "In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets. God bless |
||||||
34 | Part 3 | Matt 8:5 | gracefull | 94483 | ||
"Notice also this thread is now restricted. I suspect someone other than me got tired of your WOF rhetoric and complained." I noticed..I alos noticed you refused to actually DISCUSS the points made in the apologetic. You and Darcy both simply said..my position stands. How can you win these poor souls caught up in the WOF cult if you cannot discuss BIBLICALLY what they believe from their point of view? You expect them to just say, "Oh, you disagree and you are 'orthodox' so I must be wrong". It is interesting that one can quote from the New World Translation..Jehovah's Witness 'Bible'. And any other cultish doctrine for discussion but the minute I posted a scriptural argument for BIBLICAL consideration...they restricted the thread...What are they AFFRAID OF? This IS a Bible study forum is it not? Then why can't we posts discussions of different topics? I know why, so don't bother to answer. It is the same reason why our denominations are so divided.. someone challenges their 'theology' and they RUN! This does not convince me I am wrong...as a matte of fact it tells me I hit too close to home! God bless |
||||||
35 | Apologetic..Did Jesus Suffer in Hell? | Matt 8:5 | gracefull | 94480 | ||
Did you read this apologetic? If so, I must conclude that you disagree with it. And based on the lack of observation and comparisons, you have no desire to discuss it. God bless |
||||||
36 | A FALSE TEACHING? Yes / No | Matt 8:5 | gracefull | 94406 | ||
Darcy, I just posted a protion of a very good apologetic on the topic. It is much more indepth than I could be. Now whether Satan was directly involved in Jesus' suffering is speculation, however Jesus did come forth with the keys to death, Hell and the grave...And we know by this that Jesus was victorious over Satan who is the prince of darknes, ruler of the demonic community. I do not believe it is fairytale thinking to believe Satan was present when Jesus descended, and no doubt thought he had won. But this is speculation as far as I know. I would have to read Brother Copeland's entire message to know what scriptures he was drawing his ideas from. But as for Jesus suffering in Hell, this apologetic has ample scripture for consideration. I am signing out for the today, God bless |
||||||
37 | Part 3 | Matt 8:5 | gracefull | 94404 | ||
Part 3 This is a very avid description of what the Bible says that Jesus had to be loosed from. Other translations also give us descriptions of what is possibly the experience that our Lord had while He was in Hades: God hath raised up, having loosed the sorrows of hell, as it was impossible that he should be holden by it. (Douay-Rheims) But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him. (New International Version) But God would not allow the bitter pains of death to hold him. He raised him to life again – indeed there was nothing by which death could hold such a man. (Phillips) But God has raised him up and freed him from the suffering of death; it was impossible that death could keep its hold on him. (Jewish New Testament) However, God released him from the horrors of death and raised him back to life again, for death could not keep him in its grip. (New Living Translation) Sorrows, agony, bitter pains, suffering, and horrors. This does not sound as if our Lord sat three days in Abraham's bosom enjoying heavenly bliss until it was time for His ressurection. For those who strangely believe that He went directly to Heaven and to the Father upon His death, the words used to describe our Lord's death experience do not seem to make such an implication. Furthermore verses 27 and 31 makes it clear that His soul was in Hades. All of these descriptions are spoken of our Lord while His soul was still in Hades. Therefore it is not necessary to say that only in Gehenna one suffers torment and punishment for sin. The Bible teaches us that Hades and Gehenna are places that have torments awaiting the unrighteous one that would enter into its gates. The evidence that some scholars use to make a case against the possibility of Jesus having suffered in hell is not sufficient in light of what we have seen thus far. To read more go to this web site and read the entire apologetic. www.victoryword.100megspop2.com/tenrsn/jds/append_c.html I realize this is a long address but it is correct. God bless |
||||||
38 | Part 2.... | Matt 8:5 | gracefull | 94403 | ||
Part 2 Matthew 11:23 also speaks of Hades as a place of punishment: And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee. (Matt. 11:23-24) Again, the original Greek Word used in this passage for hell is Hades. When Jesus was speaking to the city of Capernaum, He was speaking of their downfall. There being brought down to Hades was a punishment for rejecting the mighty works of God. Since Jesus Himself spoke the two passages referenced so far and used the word Hades in both passages, I have no doubt that He was distinguishing this particular place from Gehenna. Sheol is the Hebrew equivalent of the Greek word Hades. In the Old Testament it is sometimes referred to as the place of rest for the OT saints. We have the New Testament verification of this truth in Luke 16:22. Yet, the Old Testament also uses it as a place of punishment and torment (2 Sam. 22:5-6; Psalm 9:17; 116:3-4; Prov. 15:24; Isa. 14:12-15). Now having established the fact that Hades (or Sheol) is indeed a place of torment, is it not possible that our Lord Jesus suffered there as a result of taking upon Himself our sin and becoming a curse on our behalf (2 Cor. 5:21; Gel. 3:13; 1 Pet. 2:24)? We pointed out this possibility in part two of our series of essays. We will briefly touch on this again. Acts 2:24-31: Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it. For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. As we pointed out in part two the word pains (or pangs in most versions) denotes some kind of suffering. If Jesus had only went to Abraham's bosom then He would not have suffered any pains of death. Albert Barnes gives more insight on the meaning of the "pains of death" that Christ suffered: The word translated pains denotes, properly, the extreme sufferings of parturition, and then any severe or excruciating pangs. Hence it is applied also to death, as being a state of extreme suffering. A very frequent meaning of the Hebrew word, of which this is the translation, is cord, or band. This perhaps was the original idea of the word; and the Hebrews expressed any extreme agony under the idea of bands or cords closely drawn, binding and constricting the limbs, and producing severe pain. Thus death was represented under this image of a band that confined men; that pressed closely on them; that prevented escape; and produced severe suffering. For this use of the word , see Ps 119:61 ; Isa 66:7, Jer 22:23, Hoss 13:13 . It is applied to death, ( Ps 18:5 ,) "The snares of death prevented me;" answering to the word sorrows in the previous part of the verse. Ps 116:3 , "The sorrows of death compassed me, and the pains of hell (hades or sheol, the cords or pains that were binding me down to the grave) gat hold upon me."(3) Continued... |
||||||
39 | Apologetic..Did Jesus Suffer in Hell? | Matt 8:5 | gracefull | 94397 | ||
I agree, it does not say Jesus was tortured, however, Hades was a place of torment and scripture says Jesus went there. Here are scriptures for consideration. Part 1 Appendix C Hades and Gehenna And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. (Rev. 20:13-15) In Appendix B we made a case for Jesus possibly suffering in hell and later joining the forgiven thief and His other saints in Abraham's bosom, ascending to Heaven, the place that the Bible calls Paradise, in victory having defeated Satan and his minions. However, as we briefly pointed out in note 26 of Part Two in our series, a case can be made for the distinction of the two Greek words Gehenna and Hades which are both translated as hell in the KJV. Quite often the critics of the Faith Teachers make this distinction when disputing JDS. Because the Bible clearly states that Jesus descended into Hades, the critics will say "Yes, but Hades was divided into two parts – Gehenna for punishment and Paradise for the righteous." I will prove to the reader that the Bible makes no such statement concerning Hades. I will make a case showing that Hades is currently the place where the spirits of those who have not accepted Christ as personal Saviour go upon their deaths. Also within this appendix I will show the reader that Gehenna is in fact the lake of fire where not only Hades will be cast into, but Satan and his followers will be cast there where they will suffer torment for the rest of eternity. Though it is true that Hades was divided into two compartments, nothing in the Scriptures indicates that the portion of Hades that brought torments was called Gehenna. On the contrary, the Scriptures teach that people are currently being tormented in Hades itself: And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; 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. (Luke 16:22-24) According to the Strong's concordance, the Greek word used for hell in this passage is from the word Hades (Strong's #86). The Amplified Bible translates verse 23 in this manner: And in Hades (The Realm of the dead), being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far away and Lazarus in his bosom. Other versions that use the word Hades in the place of hell are the American Standard Version, Young's Literal Translation, Wesley New Testament, Webster's, Literal Version, Darby, and the International Standard Version. These are only the ones I checked. I am sure that there are others that use the word Hades in the place of hell. I am amazed at all of the commentaries that boldly state that the rich man was in Gehenna.[1] This includes some commentaries written by scholars of the Greek language. Yet there is nothing in this passage or in the original Greek to make such an indication concerning the rich man. Nothing in this passage states that the rich man was in Gehenna. It explicitly states that he was in Hades.[2] In Hades this rich man suffered torments. The rich man himself affirmed this truth when he asked Abraham to send Lazarus to speak to his brothers: "For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment." (Luke 16:28). There is plenty of pain and suffering in the realm of Hades, which we point out again to the reader is not Gehenna. |
||||||
40 | A FALSE TEACHING? Yes / No | Matt 8:5 | gracefull | 94396 | ||
Indeed, Adam and Eve HAD died that day. Genesis 3:5-7 5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. 6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. 7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. They saw themselves as sinners. They were now under the curse. The animal sacrifice could not restore that relationship. Only Jesus would do that. God bless |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [46] >> |