Conversation Board

- Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Bruce's 5th book, a Home Study Course, is now available.
Books & Tapes by Bruce Moen
Bruce's Blog now at http://www.afterlife-knowledge.com/blog....

Home

Help

Conversation Board › Forums › Afterlife Knowledge › Question

(Moderator: Vicky)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Question (Read 13220 times)

Berserk2

Super Member

Offline

Posts: 844
Gender: male

Re: Question
Reply #30 - Feb 28^th, 2008 at 12:33am

[Alan:] "We have the same problem with Paul there in even less historical evidence for his existence than that of Jesus" (Josephes)
______________________________________

This statement displays total ignorance of standard biblical scholarship. The authenticity of 7 Pauline epistles is universally accepted by secular university and seminary scholar (Romans, 1-2 Corinthians, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, Philemon, and Philippians). The authenticity of the other 6 is disputed in varying degrees in various acedemic quarters (2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1-2 Timothy, Titus). Name even one of the dozens of New Testament Introductions that disputes this fact.

aijwvn Aion (ahee-ohn');
Word Origin: Greek, Noun Masculine, Strong #: 165

1. for ever, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity
2. the worlds, universe
3. period of time, age

So Don it could mean eternity or a period take your pick
________________________________________________

Jesus taught in Aramaic, not Greek. The Hebrew (also Aramaic) "olam" means "for a long time." The underlying Aramaic word must be considered when translating the Greek text of our Gospels. Nor is the proper translation a crap shoot. Jesus repeatedly implies that release from Hell is possible and sometimes inevitable. Translations must take context and overall teaching into account. Thus "period of time, age" seems preferable. After all, "aionios" is a cognate of the noun "aion" ("age").

Your use of Strong only reinforces the obvious: you are not a Bible scholar. Arndt and Gingrich and Liddell-Scott are the standard Greek dictionaries for New Testament scholarship. Strong is for lay people who, like yourself, have never graduated from seminary or taken Greek or Hebrew at the college level. The King James is a terribly outdated translation that employs a very corrupt Hebrew and Greek text. Am I wrong about your academic credentials?

Don

IP Logged

Alan McDougall

Super Member

Offline

Posts: 2104
South Africa
Gender: male

Re: Question
Reply #31 - Feb 28^th, 2008 at 3:52am

Don read below first and think:

Ever learning and not coming to the knowledge of the TRUTH .

It was hid from the wise and prudent and revealed to the babes and sucklngs

Professing themselves wise, they became fools in their own understanding

Quote:

Your Quote
[quote]This statement displays total ignorance of standard biblical scholarship. The authenticity of 7 Pauline epistles is universally accepted by secular university and seminary scholar (Romans, 1-2 Corinthians, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, Philemon, and Philippians). The authenticity of the other 6 is disputed in varying degrees in various acedemic quarters (2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1-2 Timothy, Titus). Name even one of the dozens of New Testament Introductions that disputes this fact

Ah so I must now accept all New Testament Iintrductons as absolute truth, again nonsense

Come on Don now you create in me an absolute “TOTAL IGNORANCE” WHAT NONSENSE

Strong is just one source I use

Your use of Strong only reinforces the obvious: you are not a Bible scholar.

(yes I am like it

or not dear allknowing Don

Are you now degenerating to the personal point of calling me a liar, do I have to go to a college of some sort to be taught scriptural truths. If this is the case then for heavens sake which College as each teaches a different approach and dogma on the bible using different translations of the bible. By the way, I do not confine my studies to the King James Bible and have a collection of over thirty bibles

I restate it so that you might begin to comprehend what I am saying. I AM A BIBLICAL SCHOLAR ESPECIALLY IN COMPARATIVE THEOLOGY

your quote

Quote:

Strong is for lay people who, like yourself, have never graduated from seminary or taken Greek or Hebrew at the college level. The King James is a terribly outdated translation that employs a very corrupt Hebrew and Greek text. Am I wrong about your academic credentials

No you are not wrong I am a lay person a Mechanical Engineer in fact, but just as educated as you are. I do not confine myself to Strong

Now Don , who did Jesus despise the most, well it was the Scribes and Pharisees was it not, he called them some bad names, vipers, hypocrites, whited sepultures tombs of the prophets containing dead men bones. Who are these types of people today?

Example

Scribes: Biblical scholars like you of course, puffed with their own subjective knowledge?

Pharisees: Talkers of the talk but never walk the walk, in other words hypocrites

Blessings and Light

Alan McDougall

IP Logged

DocM

Super Member

Offline

Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 2168

Re: Question
Reply #32 - Feb 28^th, 2008 at 8:57am

I see no reason to impugn another's intelligence or capabilities on the board. It is one thing to point out the facts and information regarding biblical scholarship and interpretation. Few people are trained in formal seminaries, or translate the ancient texts from hebrew or aramaic on their own. We should, however have the ability to discuss ideas here without this formal training.

Also we have common versions of modern day scripture (flawed as they may be in comparison to other publications). We have commonalities to discuss. One can point out the facts (with references for support), and leave out the personal attacks. Facts tend to speak for themselves.

Matthew

IP Logged

george stone Super Member Offline Afterlife Knowledge Member Posts: 857	Re: Question Reply #33 - Feb 28^th, 2008 at 5:35pm He who exsules himself shall be humbled,but he who humbles humbles himself shall be exsuled
Back to top	IP Logged

juditha

Ex Member

Re: Question
Reply #34 - Feb 28^th, 2008 at 6:23pm

Hi I have met hypocrites because when i walked past St peters church where i live,there were these old women coming out the church,all of them dressed up fancy and instead of a smile and hello how you doing,they looked at me like i was something they had tread on and i thought bloody hypocrites they just been in that church talking about the love of God and now they are out the church,they aint got a clue what Gods love is about.

Loves you all love and God bless juditha

IP Logged

recoverer

Super Member

Offline

Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 5027
Gender: male

Re: Question
Reply #35 - Feb 28^th, 2008 at 7:29pm

Juditha:

The below reminds me of a story I heard the other day. A man was frustrated because the members of a church wouldn't let him inside, because he was black. He heard a heavenly voice say, "Don't feel frustrated, I've been trying to get into that church for a long time."

Juditha, I really don't believe that you have to worry about what other people think of you.

Quote:

IP Logged

ian New Member Offline Posts: 30 uk Gender:	Re: Question Reply #36 - Feb 28^th, 2008 at 7:33pm we all believe whats in our hearts but some day we're all gonna find out the absolute truth
Back to top	IP Logged

Berserk2

Super Member

Offline

Posts: 844
Gender: male

Re: Question
Reply #37 - Feb 28^th, 2008 at 10:32pm

Matthew,
If I claimed I was a doctor and dispensed my own idea of presecriptions, you have every right to ask if I had ever graduated from medical school. Alan's claim to be a "Bible scholar" invites the question about his formal credentials and language study, especially when he espouses claims that no formally acknowledged expert would credit. He has a right to express any views, however unsubstantiated. But if he claims a certain authority by virtue of expert status, he must be prepared to back that up and face challenges. Notice carefully that he addresses none of my claims about the academic consensus with evidence or a reasoned response. I am merely trying to redirect discussion back to the relevant experiences and evidence for the thread's important topic.

Don

« Last Edit: Feb 29^th, 2008 at 2:22pm by Berserk2 »

IP Logged

Alan McDougall

Super Member

Offline

Posts: 2104
South Africa
Gender: male

Re: Question
Reply #38 - Feb 29^th, 2008 at 4:22am

Don you wrote this nonsense to Matthew

Quote:

Matthew,
If I claimed I was a doctor and dispensed my own idea of presecriptions, you have every right to ask if I had ever graduated from medical school. Alan's claim to be a "Bible scholar" invites the question about his formal credentials and language stody, especially when he espouses claims that no formally acknowledged expert would credit. He has a right to express any views, however unsubstantiated. But if he claims a certain authority by virtue of expert status, he must be prepared to back that up and face challenges. Notice carefully that he addresses none of my claims about the academic consensus with evidence or a reasoned response. I am merely trying to redirect discussion back to the relevant experiences and evidence for the thread's

Dear all-knowing only educated member of the forum from a mere layperson, with forty years of church and self study into Judeo-Christian scriptures. I would like to respond and see you reply point for point like I do and "not simply avoid and dispense what you do not agree with or dislike".

Don and come in here Matthew, read below and see if you can see the academic consensus that Don said I am avoiding, and my views are not unsubstantiated (I take umbrage to this statement)

Pauline epistles are the fourteen books in the New Testament traditionally attributed to Paul of Tarsus, of which thirteen are explicitly ascribed to Paul, and one, Hebrews, is anonymous. Except for Hebrews the Pauline authorship of these letters was not academically questioned until the nineteenth century

Note!! not academically questioned

Don so of the fourteen Pauline epistles we can only trust “seven”. Come on must I take this as reliably

Seven letters are generally classified as “undisputed”, expressing contemporary scholarly near consensus that they are the work of Paul: Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon. Six additional letters bearing Paul's name do not currently enjoy the same academic consensus: Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, and Titus. The first three, called the "Deutero-Pauline Epistles," have no consensus on whether or not they are authentic letters of Paul. The latter three, the "Pastoral Epistles", are widely regarded as pseudographs,[2] though certain scholars do consider them genuine.[3] There are two examples of pseudonymous letters written in Paul’s name apart from the alleged New Testament epistles.[4] Since the early centuries of the church, there has been debate concerning the authorship of the anonymous Epistle to the Hebrews, and contemporary scholars reject Pauline authorship

So Don, we can trust only seven Paulian letters, not a consensus to me far off. And then are they truth as they conflict with the words of Jesus, works/grace as examples

Moreover, the unity of the letters is sometimes questioned. 1 and 2 Corinthians have garnered particular suspicion, with some scholars, among them Edgar Goodspeed and Norman Perrin, supposing one or both texts as we have them today are actually amalgamations of multiple individual letters. There remains considerable discussion as to the presence of possible significant interpolations, among them Romans 1:18-2:29, 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1 and Galatians 1:13-2:14

"There remains considerable discussion" and suspicion!!, so you want us to accept something as factual as divine truth that is still under discussion, "Come on Don be real!!"

Now is this indisputable proof proof that a person called Paul actually sat down and wrote thse letters some two thousand years ago to really know we would need a time machine and go back and observe him in the processc

Going back to your unkind most unchristian comments

Don you wrote this about me

Quote:

This statement displays total ignorance of standard biblical scholarship

"TOTAL LACK" WOULD ANYONE ELSE ON THE FORUM EXCEPT YOU SEE MY RESPONSES

AS TOTAL LACK OF BIBLICAL SCHOLARSHIP.

Thank god, I am not confined to an exclusive box of thinking like you. Thank God I can absorb take in what I feel is good and true from biblical scholarship and spew out the nonsense.

Don Quoted untruthfully

Quote:

But if he claims a certain authority by virtue of "expert status", he must be prepared to back
that up and face challenges.

I clearly stated I was a layperson and my expertise was Mechanical Engineering. Don, go back on the threads and find where I ever said I was an expert on biblical matters, then again based on your threads and posts I bring into question your so called non existent expertise. [highlight]Anyway, an expert on scripture other than God and You simply do not exist[/highlight

Now another question you avoided, you are adamant that one has to go to some College or other to be able to call them a bible student "WHICH ONE IS CORRECT AND TRUE? (THE ONE YOU ATTENDED I BET). "FOR HEAVENS SAKE TELL ME AND I WILL JOIN TOMORROW!!.

So while puffed up Christian theologians like you, with its billions of fragmented approaches, continue to seak the truth and come to some real consenses about the scriptures "in vain". I will do my own thing and study scripture anyway I like.

Now about you trying to equate to Matthew the scientific study of medicine and the unscientific mess of religion as the ultimate of preposterous nonsense

alan

« Last Edit: Feb 29^th, 2008 at 12:11pm by Alan McDougall »

Blessings and Light

Alan McDougall

IP Logged

Berserk2

Super Member

Offline

Posts: 844
Gender: male

Re: Question
Reply #39 - Feb 29^th, 2008 at 3:10pm

"Paul and his letters are considered the ultimate resource
for those who rely on law and logic, because what he says
relies on law, not the 'mysteries' of belief.
_____________________________________________

Precisely the opposite is true.
"Christ is THE END of Law, so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes (Romans 10:4)."
"The Law was our guardian and teacher to lead us until Christ came...But now that faith in Christ has come, WE NO LONGER NEED THE LAW AS OUR GUARDIAN (Galatians 3:24-25)."
"I ask you again, does God give you the Holy Spirit AND WORK MIRACLES AMONG YOU because you obey the Law of Moses? Of course not! It is because you believe the message about Christ (Galatians 3:5)."

"[Paul:] shunned Christ's message of love and the mysteries of spirit (miracles.)"
_______________________________________________________________________
1 Corinthians 13 is the absolute zenith of biblical celebration of love ("agape"), a subject that absolutely permeates Paul's epistles. e. g. "For when we place our faith in Christ Jesus, it makes no difference whether we are circumcised or uncircumcised (i. e. follow the Law). What is important is faith expressing itself in love (Galatians 5:6)."

The comments about Paul's "shunning" of miracles are misguided. Paul's miracles are recounted by his missionary companion, Luke, in the Book of Acts. These miracles include raising the dead! But just look at some of the ways Paul celebrates Chrisitan miracles, including his own, in his own letters:

"I patiently did many signs and wonders and miracles among you (2 Corinthians 12:12)."
"God gives to one person THE POWER TO PERFORM MIRACLES, and to another the ability to prophesy (1 Corinthians 12:10).
"Here is a list of some of the members that God has placed in the body of Christ:...those who perform miracles, those who have the gift of healing...( 1 Corinthians 12:28)."

Don

« Last Edit: Mar 1^st, 2008 at 2:12pm by Berserk2 »

IP Logged

Berserk2

Super Member

Offline

Posts: 844
Gender: male

Re: Question
Reply #40 - Feb 29^th, 2008 at 8:11pm

Alan,

The point from which you sidetracked the thread is this: Jesus wrote nothing; but Paul wrote several epistles, of which our New Testament has 7 indisputably authored by him. Therefore, Paul's existence is at least as well attested as Jesus.' Period.

You wrongly distinguish the Deuteuro-Pauline epistles from the Pastoral Epistles. "Deuteros" is the Greek word for "second" as in "second Paul." The Pastoral Epistles are also deutero-Pauline. All 6 of thsee letters are full of genuinely Pauline teaching, though they are probably not actually authored by Paul. The chief difference is that one Deutero-Pauline letter (1 Timothy 2:9-15) denies women the right to be church leaders. The real Paul celebrates female leaders! The question of the unity of epistles is also irrelevant, though you have mistated it. The unity issue chiefly deals with the fact that both 2 Corinthians and Philippians are a fusion of two of Paul's letters into one. Both letters in each epistle are authentic. But when Paul's letters were first collected around 85 AD, two passages were interpolated into the Corinthians correspondence: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (the passage that rules out female leadership) and 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1 (nothing controversial there).

Also your point about a contradiction between Jesus and Paul is incorrect. But if you want to defend your claim, please do so in an offtopic post. Why have you refused to address my case for annihilation that supports the findings of Bruce Moen and Howard Storm's NDE? After all, that issue is this thread's topic. And I rechecked--you did claim to be a "Bible scholar" and thus invited inquiries into your credentials when you dismiss the established perspectives of acknowedged experts.

Don

« Last Edit: Mar 1^st, 2008 at 1:48pm by Berserk2 »

IP Logged

Alan McDougall

Super Member

Offline

Posts: 2104
South Africa
Gender: male

Re: Question
Reply #41 - Mar 1^st, 2008 at 12:25am

Don,

Don,

Of course, I said I was a biblical scholar but I think we have different approaches to this word. It means Academic Intellectual thinker theorist philosopher truth-seeker logician, and I am guilty of all those approaches to life. I concede I have never attended a seminary of College on biblical matters and have emphasized repeatedly that I am a self-taught scholar, yes scholar in these matters. Do I have to attend a college to qualify as scholar, come on

Don?

My previous quote
Quote:

Now I will reply about destruction of the soul, yes Jesus did seem to indicate this possibility, He said don’t fear the one who can destroy your body but fear the one who can destroy your body and soul in hell. Many believe when Jesus used the term destroy he meant the physical not the soul. What I do not like about total elimination of the reprobate and depraved that it lets them off the hook .I feel that there must be punishment for their sins if you like.

I am not a closed book on this matter, however.

alan

Blessings and Light

Alan McDougall

IP Logged

Griffin

Junior Member

Offline

Posts: 62

Re: Question
Reply #42 - Mar 1^st, 2008 at 3:35am

Don,

Thank you for your welcome.
I cannot explain in one post why I feel there is not a single soul that can ever be lost.

My understanding/belief doesn't depend upon the intervention of a deity.
I don't come from the viewpoint of religion or a saviour.

My understanding comes more from real-estate.... knowing what is underneath one's feet,
where one stands.

Of course, my experiences are useless to you. They cannot change how you think.
Regardless, I hope to talk with you again.

Jack

IP Logged

Alan McDougall

Super Member

Offline

Posts: 2104
South Africa
Gender: male

Re: Question
Reply #43 - Mar 1^st, 2008 at 9:58am

Don,

Here is the answer to your question about eternal elimination in the afterlife from my blog http://wwwalanmcdougall.blogspot.com. Read my blog and you will see we are not very far off in our beliefs.

I put this in my blog long before we dialogued on the topic, so you will see I am not as ignorant and uninformed as you think!

No Eternal Torment In Hell Because God Is LOVE
God is Love

This is the Good News taught by Yeshua of Nazareth, Jesus the Christ. God is the Father, not just the Source of all that is, but the loving Source of all that is. Or as St. John even more succinctly put it, God is love. Not "loving." Not "full of love," but simply is love, period. Because God is universal love, the early church often held the idea of universal salvation. But unfortunately, the Good News often becomes "mixed news" in modern church pews. The distorted version of Christianity taught to many is a subtle dualism, with an eternal heaven and eternal hell, eternal bliss and eternal torture, an eternal God saving the few, and an eternal devil snaring the many. This teaching is terribly mistaken, yet widely accepted—even demanded—in many branches of Christianity.

Eternal Torture?
There is the idea that God is love, but will also torment all who "do not accept Jesus" (itself a gross misunderstanding of the gospel) forever. The resulting image is not only monstrous, but an impossible contradiction. It is inconceivable to imagine any person causing the pain of another forever. Maybe a day perhaps. Maybe a few years, if I am exceptionally evil. However, who among us would torture even Hitler forever? If he were tortured a year for every person who died in World War II, that is 530,000,000 years. Moreover, as some would gladly remind you, that is not even a second as far as forever is concerned.

No one other than a psychopath could torment anyone endlessly. No father could punish his children endlessly. But some say that the One who is Infinite Love does it forever. Something is wrong!

We have been told that:
• the punishment for finite crimes is infinite punishment.
• the One who is infinite Love has finite patience-but patience is a quality of love! (1 Cor. 13;4)

• the One of infinite might has a plan that finite man can thwart.
The threat of eternal torture is like a gun pointed to a person's head. It turns a loving invitation into spiritual rape. A further problem is that an eternal punishment is pointless, since it does not rehabilitate or heal. Shall we accept this picture at face value, contrary to our own knowledge of love, contrary to our own experience of God's nature, and contrary to innumerable promises of Scripture, or, shall we delve deeper, to get at the mystical truths of what the Bible calls judgment and salvation?

Eternal?
Nothing in the Bible suggests that punishment after death is irrevocable except for the drama of some images and the entrenched mistranslation of some words and passages. The word in the Greek NT most often translated as "forever" or "eternal" is aion which means an age, and the adjectival form, aionian, means age-long. This is the source of the English word eon. The corresponding Hebrew term is olam, "age" or "world." Both these terms indicate conditions with an indefinite, but not an infinite, duration.
Eternal and forever are unfortunate mistranslations for age and world, both of which end, as God is the Creator and Sustainer of both.

How can one be punished for a finite transgression with an infinite punishment, it is not just and God is known by all as the Righteous Just judge

You see I am very informed old fellow and you took the bait and we have had some excellent dialogue as a result, did we not.
alan

alan

Blessings and Light

Alan McDougall

IP Logged

Alan McDougall

Super Member

Offline

Posts: 2104
South Africa
Gender: male

Re: Question
Reply #44 - Mar 1^st, 2008 at 10:11am

Don

I put this story here as well in case you miss it in the other thread:

[color=#000000]FUNDAMENTALISTS READ THIS STORY OF SUBA
The story of Suba an African girl

The following trial and judgment is based on the teachings of the world’s leading clergymen and theologians. “My God is a god of love not the monster depicted by these idiots “in the following imaginary trial on the great judgment day of God”

A theoretical Judgment Day for a young African girl named Suba, who died at age seventeen while giving birth to her first child:
god: What do you have to say for yourself, Suba?

Suba: I’m sorry, your holiness, I am frightened and I don’t understand the question.

god: There is nothing to be frightened of, my child. I won’t hurt you [yet]. Tell me about your life.

Suba: I was born number three of seven children. My mother and father loved us very much. They taught us many things like, food getting, fire cooking, clothes making, basket making, the rules of our tribe, and how to worship the great maker.

god: That would be me. I am the Great Maker. Tell me about that. How did you worship me?

Suba: Well, we were told to treat everyone in the tribe real good. That is what the great maker wanted all of us to do -- be real good to all people. We were told that the great maker would then be real good to us. Life was pretty good except when we didn’t have much food to eat, and when a bad tribe from far away came and burned our village and killed many of our people.
god: Did you hate those bad men who killed your people?

Suba: Yes, your holiness, of course we hated them.

god: Do you know that it is a sin to hate?

Suba: What is a sin?

god: Something bad.

Suba: I knew it was bad to sass back to my Mother and Father. I was but seven years old when my village was burned. I don’t think I hate them anymore. All I ever wanted was a place to live in peace with enough food to eat, and to raise my baby to be a fine woman. Is that bad, your holiness?
god: You mean to tell me you have never done anything bad that you knew was bad?

Suba: Yes I did, your holiness, many times. And my mother would hit my bottom with a stick if she saw me do something bad. But when I was having my baby, it hurt a hundred times more than when mother hit me with a stick. And that’s the last thing I remember until being brought here.

god: You know, Suba, I had a son.

Suba: I’ll bet you were real proud of him.

god: No one will ever know how much. All his life, he taught people to love each other and to forgive each other for being bad, and even to love their enemies.

Suba: He sounds like a nice man.

god: Yes he was. But when he was just a young man, the worshippers of the great maker banded together and killed my son by nailing him to a tree.

Suba: Oh, god! I am so sorry. I know you must miss him a lot.

god: No, child. He’s alive with me. I brought him back to life only three days after they killed him. He is now the savior of all people on earth.

Suba: We never heard of your son in Africa. I so wish that your son could have saved my tribe from those bad people when I was a little girl.

god: My son can save people even if they are dead.

Suba: Wow! That sounds too good to be true. How does you son actually save all people?

god: He doesn’t save all people.

Suba: But your holiness, you said he is the savior of all the people on earth.
god: Yes, my child. My son is the savior of all people; it’s just that he doesn’t actually save all people.

Suba: I don’t understand "he is, but he isn’t." If I would have ever said something as mixed up as that to my Momma, she would have hit me with a stick.

god: Let me explain: My son died such a bad death to pay for all the bad things that bad people do. Now anyone who believes my son did a good thing for them, will not be hurt for the bad things they did, but will live for ever. I have written all these rules in a book called the bible. It says in the bible that what you get for doing bad is death. But if any one likes my son’s sacrifice for their bad life, I will give them a free gift of life.

Suba: Oh god! I hardly know what to say. You mean if I believe in your son who did a good thing for me, even though I have often been bad, that you will give me a life that never ends?

god: No child. Not you. You don’t understand the higher scholarship of

Christian theology. You see, you don’t qualify to be saved.

Suba: What is "c h r i s t i a n t h e o l o g y?"

god: It’s too confusing, Child, not even theologians know what it is.

Suba: Why don’t I "qualify?" What must I do to "qualify?"
god: You don’t have to do anything to qualify. Salvation is by grace. That means it’s a free gift

Suba: Then why don’t I qualify, your holiness?

god: Well, what I mean is you can’t qualify for salvation, but you can be disqualified by not qualifying for the qualification that is not required, seeing salvation is free by grace. Or, ah, something like that.

Suba: Do you reckon, your holiness, one of those theologians might be able to explain that a litter better for me?

god: No, my child, besides, it is too late for you to be saved.

Suba: But, your holiness, why is it too late?

god: Because you didn’t accept my son and his sacrifice before you died giving birth.

Suba: But, your holiness, I didn’t know of your son and his sacrifice before I died.

god: Tough child. I can’t be bothered with all the complicated details
of trying to get everybody saved. Besides, most of the highest educated theologians in the world clearly teach that if one dies not knowing of my son’s sacrifice for them, it is too late to ever be saved.

Suba: You mean my punishment for being bad will not be taken away by your son and I will be given death for ever?

god: Not exactly, child. I know my bible says death, but my theologians thought that death was too good for bad people, so they changed it to a never-ending life of torture in fire. And it will hurt hundreds and hundreds and countless billions of times more than when you died giving birth. I will never stop burning your flesh, Suba, not even for a second, and, of course, your baby daughter will be burning right by your side. Actually most of Africa will be burning with you. Billions and billions. Just burning and burning. Billions and bill ... Excuse me, Suba, go ahead.

Suba: But god, your holiness, why? Why?

god: Look child, as one of my leading theologians recently suggested, it is not incumbent upon me to save everyone. Indeed it is not incumbent upon me to save anyone. Besides you are my enemy and I hate you. I know it doesn’t sound fair child, but you have to understand, these great theologians of the world have made these rules, and so my hands are tied.

Suba: But god, I don’t hate you.

god: Now don’t try to lay a guilt trip on me child, I said I hate you, you're my enemy, and that’s final.

Suba: But your holiness, you said your son taught everyone to love their enemies?

“”GOD: ANGELS OF THE GUARD, “THIS GIRL IS GETTING ON MY NERVES”. “THROW HER INTO THE FIRES OF HELL TO BURN SCREAM IN HORROR, DESOLATION, AND LONELINESS FOR EVER. AND EVER AND EVER, WITH NO END TO HER INFINITE TORMENT””
“’ FOR THE TINY MINUTE FINITE TRANSGRESSIONS SHE LIKE ALL HUMANS OF ALL FAITHS HAVE DONE. ONLY” BORNAGAINCHRISTIANS” ARE SAVED FROM THIS HORROR!!

god: Next Who are we now going to confine to everlasting torment?

'Abject rubbish god is love and loves all of humanity not a minute tiny within the beautiful vastness of the infinite cosmic'Regards
Alan

[/color]

Blessings and Light

Alan McDougall

IP Logged

Pages: 1 2 3 4

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

« Home

‹ Board

Top of this page

This is a Peer Moderated Forum. You can report Posting Guideline violations.

Fill Out and Submit Posting Guideline Violation Form