Why do YOU think YOU DON'T deserve HELL?

Thanks PB, I guess I am out of platutudes for myself, I jolly myself alongbut in honesty, I have lost the urge to get out and about.

Maybe you could get some Prayer/intercession going for my left elbow...I should upload pics but ye may not yet have eaten...

Maybe P-Bob is some youth minister somewhere who read a book in his Baptist missionary catalog, "ministering on the internets; all of them"...

No "bot" can write heartfelt witness.
I witness here because some do read.
I was Given/Told to witness...
Has been a great Blessing in my life.

Very plain who Knows the Mysteries of Heaven (Born-Again) and who does not.

Got religion but can't surrender? Such is the way of carnality. Accepting Christ is not how we are Delivered from carnality. Those who don't Know HIM call accepting HIM, "being saved"; but acceptance of Christ is just The Beginning of The Way Unto The Father.

Don't understand what maranatha means?
It is an early Christian greeting that translates, "Jesus IS Coming!"

All comes down to Knowing HIM.
You either do or don't.

Funny how all the carnals love to erect barriers to witness. "That guy uses rough language; he can't be Of The Lord...", or; "God would never use someone like that...".

God Does As HE Wills.
Get Born-Again and you discover there is trillions times more to HIM than you ever conceived...

Read Matthew ch 13; all of it, and see if you understand why Jesus teaches by using Parables... HE even Witnesses of HIS Purpose in doing so. It ain't what you'd imagine.

Fishers of Men who are Born-Again are employing witness, not trolling for souls. Being Brought Into HIS Accord, you understand that God is not limited to our carnal expectations. It is that carnal-heart that is the barrier. Only God can remove that barrier and that is what happens when you surrender and Come Into HIS Presence.

Seek to save your life and you will lose it.
The carnal-heart is confounded at the paradox. The Born-Again beholds only Perfection; no paradox to those In-HIM.

So many Scriptural Witnesses that we can be Delivered from sin. Ezekiel, John 17, First John epistle ch 2... The carnal-Christian rationalizes that this cannot be so, citing Scriptures that witness that none were without sin before they were Born-Again as proof....

Yet, only by making surrender do we receive HIS Deliverance, and the carnal can't trust the witness, much less even Trust God, in order to learn the witness is true! What a conundrum! Like an even tougher paradox...


Those who bullshit others, ostensibly in HIS Name, are going to wish they had never been born. HIS Witness! Truth Become Flesh!

Not Born-Again as Ezekiel 36:27 Witnesses? Such is my discernment. Gonna be a rough row to hoe, unless you repent for your false-witnessing and cease/desist. Make your surrender and then come back and witness about that. It will be the most vivid and wonderful experience of your life. If you can't witness of it, then maybe it didn't happen.

Maranatha!!!

Hello Sir.Kalin,


I hope things are better for you tonight.

Lets first not worry about that.

See Satan does not have to "win" souls, they are already going to Hell with him.

All he has to do is prevent you from finding the path that leads to salvation, he does this by many copies, many lies, and many tricks.

Not that you are wrong for asking questions, or looking for answers. But make sure you are looking for the answers that will lead to the path out of the place that you currently are.

Are you well tonight?

Mo, I will give you the benefit for now, but you should consider your path.

now see here is the thing

we have at least two mature christians fighting it out, whilst I ask for intercessory prayer to take this nauseating pain away.

For it is written, for two are stronger than one, for when one shall fall, th eother will take up th eslack...


Now Please


Drop the arguments and for fuck sake intercede


then we shall see the Power of the Holy Spirit over the carnal mind



so how about it guys?

huh?

I am fine. Thanks for checking. Hope you are too.

I think it is very important to clarify and answer my question, because there clearly is no place of eternal torment for human beings that is definitively described in the bible.

And without such then the whole basis of your religion turns to rubbish. (Which it really is altogether in the first place anyway.)

I think (and I am sure most would agree with me here too) that a person really should know their stuff for certain before telling such things to people whimsically and scaring the ever living crap out of them for no good reason.

I do agree with you if Hell is not eternal punishment then it is all a sham and why bother. Like your posts says, lets party nothing matters.


Are we in agreement?

Well let's use our brains too.

There's no litteral hell Bobby boy

:5:

I never leave mine at the door.

Now what source of information can we agree upon.

I would agree to Jewish Publication Society Bible 1917.

Hebrew Old Testament (Tanach)

To start with.

how about yall yake some time out from yer headwanking pontifications and do yer fucking jobs...ie...be in prayer...ah fuckit dont worry..see PB that was my test to you, and I guess the result will burn into your psyche, or not...

Carry on

Sir Kalin and I have "history"

Your prayer brought him out.

Use whatever you want. It makes no difference...oh wait it really does though because the earliest known manuscript (Codex Sinaiticus) differs drastically from the Dead Sea Scrolls. And so do all the other earlier manuscripts.



[link to www.geocities.com]
WHAT YOUR CHURCH AND PASTOR NEVER TOLD YOU ABOUT THE NEW TESTAMENT #8

Faced with the irrefutable truth that the history of the Protestant New Testament is one of mass of confusion, a die-hard fundamentalist, trying desperately to cling to his faith, might naturally be tempted to look at the forerunner of their New Testament, i.e., the Latin Vulgate, as a possible candidate for the "infallible" word of God. Even though such a claim is made by the Roman Catholic Church the truth is that their own history relates a different story.

Christian legend says that in the time of St. Jerome the bible then in use, which is now known as the Old Latin, was deemed to be in a mess. So hopeless was the situation that the pope himself prevailed upon the great St. Jerome to correct the situation by using the "original Greek" New Testament to produce a new translation (The New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 2, p. 441). This Jerome supposedly did. The editors of The Cambridge History of the Bible make the point essential to this study: "A natural question is: Can the 'old' Greek manuscript that Jerome used in the preparation of the Vulgate gospels be identified? The short answer is, No" (The New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 2, p. 529). However, as they point out, scholars are able to partially identify some of Jerome's work as being based on both the Alexandrian and Western families of text—which doesn't tell us a whole lot (The New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 2, p. 529). For instance it doesn't tell us anything about the "original" manuscripts or their origin, nor does it tell us how much of these Jerome used or indeed how many changes he made. To accept the Latin Vulgate as the "infallible word of God" one essentially has to place their faith in Jerome and equally in the numerous revisers that followed him. They also have to unquestionably accept the manuscripts behind the Vulgate.

Considering that all we really know of the Vulgate is that it is based on the Old Latin, then we need to examine this source closer, which is virtually impossible because it has an obscure origin. The only definite fact about the Old Latin is that the surviving fragments exhibit many variations, which means that they are far from being a candidate for the "infallible" word of God." On top of this almost all scholars seriously doubt that Jerome ever translated the entire New Testament, which tells us that the Vulgate, like the Protestant versions, is essentially nothing more than a composite work (The Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. I, pp. 373-374). Jerome is essentially credited with translating the four-gospels. Short and to the point, these are the facts that are conveniently forgotten while Roman Catholics denounce the heresy of Protestant bible translations!

Answer for yourself: But what about the other sources for Jerome's work? What about the Alexandrian and Western texts, which scholars have identified as partial sources for the Vulgate, and which, by the way, are also employed by scholars for modern Protestant translations?
THE GREAT CODICES

A “codice” is a manuscript volume containing the Scriptures. To further complicate matters for fundamentalist Christians the last few centuries have brought the discoveries of several so-called great Uncials, so designated because they were written in Greek capital letters. The Unicals are the oldest known extant manuscripts of the Christian New Testament and are as follows: The Codex Alexandrinus from the fifth century AD, the Codex Sinaiticus from the fourth or early fifth centuries; The Codex Vaticanus, the oldest, from the fourth century; the Codex Ephroemi, from the fifth century and the Codex Bezae from the sixth century.

One would think that the discovery of these MSS. would be a welcomed event in Christendom, hailed as a great advancement in the study of Christian scripture. It was not!

Answer for yourself: Why not for Heaven's sake?

This is because the great Uncials not only disagree with the present Christian bible, they show unmistakable signs of having been heavily edited.

Imagine, the oldest known MSS. of the New Testament show disturbing evidence of having been "worked over" by Catholic monks!

And, if these facts weren't bad enough, some of the great Uncials include the ancient and so-called spurious books of the bible. For example the Codex Sinaiticus includes the Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas—a fact that focuses one's attention on the infamous Christian councils and their disgraceful process of "canonizing" the New Testament, a subject that I will deal with shortly.

To completely understand why these oldest of all manuscripts are so controversial within fundamental Christianity we only need cite several examples.

In 1938 scholar T.C. Skeat examined the fourth century Codex Sinaiticus under ultra-violet light. Under the visible text he found the following verse, which had been erased: "Consider the lilies of the field: they neither card nor spin. " Biblical historian Robin Lane Fox writes, "the King James translators have beguiled us with a wrong version; there was growing, no toiling, in what the author wrote. Strictly, there were no 'lilies', because they are a very free translation of the Greek; however, the botanists' favorite candidate for the flower in question (a Stembergia) would spoil the flow of the saying" (Fox, The Unauthorized Version, pp. 140-141, referring to Matthew 6:28).

Another example is the story of Jesus' encounter with the woman taken in adultery. Manfred Barthel writes, "Two passages in this Gospel [John] are not included in the most reliable ancient manuscripts, and stylistic analysis confirms that they were added by another writer" (What the Bible Really Says, p. 232). Robin Lane Fox adds, "'He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her"; “Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more". The episode is missing from the surviving fourth-century codices which underpin the rest of the New Testament text; it is not known in an early papyrus or any quotation by an early Christian author, although the subject was relevant to so much which they discussed. Its style is universally held to differ from the rest of the fourth Gospel, and in its present place it interrupts the flow of the text" (The Unauthorized Version, p. 143).

Most Christians are unaware that there are two versions of the Acts of the Apostles. One is almost a tenth longer than the other. Again, Robin Lane Fox makes the relevant observation: "The shorter, usual text is based on one of the main Greek lines, the Alexandrian, whereas the longer alternative is best represented in a book-text, Codex Bezae, of the fifth to sixth century date which contains the Gospels and Acts in Greek and Latin. Its extra wordings and variant readings are sometimes reflected in early Christian quotations or in early papyrus fragments of Acts' text" (The Unauthorized Version, p. 141).

In just these few examples out of hundreds we can see why so many present-day ministers have denounced the great codices as corrupt—they present an embarrassing predicament. And these are simple examples and not nearly as serious as the inclusion or pagan doctrines as put into the mouth of Jesus and others in the New Testament [ [link to paganizingfaithofyeshua.netfirms.com].] Essentially, what we see in the most ancient extant Greek manuscripts is the evolution, if you'll pardon the expression, of the New Testament Gospel stories especially when compared to the present-day finished product. That this is exactly what these MSS. prove has caused no small embarrassment for countless theologians who, on more than one occasion, have said that it was unfortunate that these early MSS. survived to the present because by their contents they serve no useful purpose for the unity of the Christian faith.

Such embarrassment stands behind the following comment from Christian fundamentalist, Dr. D.A. Waite, in his book Defending the King James Bible. After relating the story about how Professor Konstantin von Tischendorf discovered the Codex Sinaiticus in a trash basket at St. Catherine's Monastery in the Sinai, and buying it for several hundred dollars, Waite quotes a Dr. James Qurollo: "I don't know which of them had the truer evaluation of its worth—Tischendorf, who wanted to buy it, or the monks, who were getting ready to burn it!" Waite adds to this comment, "He had to pay for the trash. It really was that, because of all the heretic' changes"(Waite, Defending The King James Bible, p. 60).

Heresy, as Dr. Waite charges, is not the only transparent argument used against the great codices. Here is an even more radical excuse, which is offered by a Christian fundamentalist church: "The oldest extant copies [of the New Testament] are the most corrupt! . . . The oldest fragments of the New Testament are of the 'Western Text,' used by the early Catholic Church fathers in the first three centuries. This type of text is full of spurious additions, notable corruption's, deletions and contradictions. These 'oldest' fragments vary so from each other that there would be no way of knowing what constitutes the New testament! This 'Western Text' admittedly originated in Rome!"

Dr. D.A. Waite echoes this opinion: "Both Dr. Frederick Scrivener and Dean John William Burgon agreed that the greatest pollution of the stream of pure manuscripts was accomplished in the first 100 years after the New Testament was written! So some believe that the oldest are not necessarily the best! This is especially true since the heretics had their knives out "correcting" the Greek N.T. almost as soon as it was written" (The Four-Fold Superiority of the King James Version, p. 8). Waite follows this thought in his book, Defending the King James Bible, when he writes of the oldest codices: ". . . [they] had very little, if any, use by their owners. I believe this was true because the owners recognized them to be perverted texts, having been defaced and polluted by heretics and others . . . they are neither the best nor the purest. They were corrupted by heretics" (p. 59). With these biased, ignorant words ringing in our ears, let's touch on a very significant point.

Christian fundamentalists laud the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, in particular the Book of Isaiah, as incontrovertible evidence that the Old Testament is the "infallible word of God." That is to say, because the Isaiah scroll essentially agrees with the now accepted book of Isaiah, or the Masoretic text of the Christian bible, it is proof; say the fundamentalists, of Isaiah's authenticity and God's hand in its preservation. This is a fine sounding argument if it weren't for one problem: Among those same Dead Sea Scrolls is a copy of the book of Jeremiah that is more in line with the Septuagint, which is the translation behind the Old Testament of the great Uncials. This fact has caused considerable controversy within many fundamentalist Christian circles, and it may well be one of the reasons that it took some fifty years before Christian scholars were finally forced lo make the Dead Sea Scrolls public.

But let us notice something: the same men who hold up the ancient example of the Dead Sea Scroll book of Isaiah as proving the authenticity of the bible, will not apply the same test to the oldest Greek MSS. of the New Testament. That is because when applied to the New Testament this comparison proves the opposite of what they are claiming, which is the doctrine of an infallible Christian bible. Hence they complain that the oldest are the most corrupt! This claim, by the way, is an unscientific principle, especially in the field of history where the closer one comes to the original source the nearer they are to the truth. At Qumran was discovered older Hebrew texts that differed considerably in unique places from the Greek Septuagint and which also predated it by some 1000 years. This is of importance because they also basically agreed with the oldest existing (up to then) Hebrew texts of 900-1000 A.D. These older Hebrew texts had differed also considerably with the Greek LXX and were basically discounted by Christianity as the more authentic because of their age as well as their "theological diversity" when compared with the LXX. But with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls the Jewish Palestinian Masoretic text was exonerated and now the question as to "theological diversity" falls squarely upon the Greek Septuagint which now appears to have altered in no small way the "theology" concerning atonement and the Jewish Messiah. Basically Christianity has been turned upside down with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (see [link to bennoah1.freewebsites.com).]

Perhaps the irony of the whole situation is that if the great Uncials had been in complete agreement with the present-day Christian bible, their discovery would have been hailed as one of the greatest events in Christian history! Indeed, most Christian fundamentalists blatantly display their hypocrisy in this regard by their consistent use of the earliest known fragments of the New Testament as proof of the New Testament's authenticity. In other words because of their age (the earliest dating from the second century AD) these fragments are lauded as proof that the New Testament was written by the men to whom later church lathers assigned authorship. However, what is conveniently forgotten is that these early fragments, like the great Uncials, are from the so-called Alexandrian and Western texts, meaning that they often disagree with the present-day Byzantine Text-based New Testament.

Even more to the point is that when compared one to another, these fragments are full of contradictions. First of all there are only some eighty eight pieces that date before AD 300, with only a few dating before AD 180. As to their conflicting readings we only need cite the example of two early papyri from the Gospel of John. They overlap across seventy verses and, as Robin Lane Fox notes, "even if the plain errors of their copyists are excluded, they differ at no less than seventy small places (Fox, The Unauthorized Version, p. 139).

However, none of the above information seems to deter the intellectually dishonest. Even with the history of the New Testament squarely in front of them they still make statements like this: "None of the modern [NT] scholars have thought to look at the bulk of later New Testament Manuscripts —95% of known Greek Biblical MSS. [i.e., the Byzantine Texts]—which the Greek people and its church have always used! These later MSS., copied century after century from earlier ones as they wore out, are the fundamental basis of the King James Version (KJV)."

As we have seen from the information already presented the author of this statement is being completely dishonest. Scholars have indeed "thought to look at the bulk of later New Testament Manuscripts", which is why there is such great confusion among the many different New Testament translations. Further, the manuscripts that the "Greek people and its church have always used" date back only to the seventh century AD, with complete texts preserved about 200 years later than this time. The author compounds this misinformation with the following: "The nearly 4,000 MSS. of this Byzantine or Official Text agree so perfectly with each other that the only work of the critic is to weed out individual scribal mistakes in the copying of each Ms. The text is not in question!' The author of the above never bothered to give any sources for his statements, which was wise considering the evidence would expose his dishonesty. Yet, I for one, as a former dedicated "the bible is the infallible word of God" advocate, would never have questioned such statements in the past. I would have read this statement in total agreement! Why? Because my fundamentalist background and natural life-long bias in favor of Christianity would lead me to accept without question such an argument—just like a born-Buddhist would accept the fundamentals of his faith without question. The fact is that like 99.99% of all Christians, I had never bothered to research the history of the New Testament. I was born into a Christian fundamentalist family, had grown up believing in New Testament infallibility, and that was good enough for me. My past attitude can be summed up in the little fundamentalist ditty so often quoted: "the bible says it, I believe it, and that settles it!"

Last Edited by Lord.Kayle on 10/12/2009 03:13 AM

I know It took much searching, but I figured it out.

You come from a KJV only crowd.


You have almost all the things you need but this should help answer what has been bugging you.



It has been miss applied many times People devoid of Spirit.

But the one you have seen but not understood.



With this you have all you need. I can help you little more in this matter.

It is between you and God, many times many chances.




You should think about this. Thanks for YOUR thoughts.

For a Muslim, the purpose of life is to live in a way that is pleasing to Allah so that one may gain Paradise. It is believed that at puberty, an account of each person's deeds is opened, and this will be used at the Day of Judgment to determine his eternal fate. The Qur'an also suggests a doctrine of divine predestination. {1}

The Muslim doctrine of salvation is that unbelievers (kuffar, literally "those who are ungrateful") and sinners will be condemned, but genuine repentance results in Allah's forgiveness and entrance into Paradise upon death.

[link to www.religionfacts.com]

Sound familiar?

This is what hundreds of millions of people believe. They are just as convinced of their faith as you are of yours. Then there are all the countless other beliefs in this world. That's what it actually all boils down to - belief!

Of course it sounds familar, The 3 came from Abraham,

even in the Koran it talks of this.


Now you have to work through for yourself what is true and what is false, but then again is that not true of everything in life.

You believe the sun will rise tomorrow, You believe we went to the moon, you believe we did not. You believe many things, some are true some are not.


I am only to point out what I know to be true. I am also human and can make mistakes, God allows this or else you would then blame ME for something you did.

I is no different than on this site, use discernment, That is what God tells us, But the truth is the truth, that is why people feel guilt, know some things are wrong with out having to be told.

It also explains why others can be cannibals and not think twice about it, why some parts of the world can slash each other to death with machinates.

But you will believe what you want. You will bush it off as just a bad dream, you will harden your heart.


Unless someone comes by and shakes things up and warns you, but even then, look at Revelation with all the judgments pouring out to wake people up, they continue to blame God, try to kill the messenger, in hopes it will go away.


I can point these things out, but unless you do the work yourself you will not have faith.

Sir.Kalin

I also have this for you to think about.


I have not been able to put my finger where non-believers break down in logic.

But here is part of the problem.


1- God is all knowing-

Non believers, think that because he is All knowing then he is also responsible for you actions.

This is False.


If I tell you that the stove is hot, and don't touch it.

But you touch it anyway, and I knew you would. How is that MY fault?

Now lets say God Made us all "perfect" and we never fell from heaven, none of us.

Do we have free will? If the game is rigged did we play a game? If we all win how much fun is that?

In everything there is a pecking order, we have to figure it out. God on top, and then we run the race trying to figure things out, those who cheat and think they are "winning" will have to go to the back of the line.

But here is the thing. In this process, there will always be some worthless bit of something what happens when you eat not all is used you have waste, do you want to be the waste?

And in the end when you think you have been given a "raw" deal, you have no one to blame but yourself.

The sooner you realize that YOU are not God, that he Created you for His purpose, not yours, then sooner you can get over yourself, accept the rules, and move forward.


The rules are simple, it is a flip of a coin,

Heads- God wins

Tails- You Loose


But God winning does not mean you loose.

That is your problem, you think that by you saying God wins that takes something away from you, When in fact it does not.

So don't be stupid and force Tails.



Now people think that God Rigged the game, well no he did not, all along the way, if we would have played by his rules then we would have all been able to win. And be fine with everyone winning.

But we demanded more, Thought what we had was not enough, complained that the other person was getting something we weren't.

Communism crap, We are all created equal, any idiot can see that is not true.

But how much does God love each one of us, without measure, the old adage of parents spanking their children is true, it hurts God more than it hurts you. If you have children you know this, but if they continue to do wrong you also have to protect your other children too.

And in the end, So does God, he protects his elect. But he also gave us all opportunities, don't piss yours away.

ironic fail

That's funny, You really have no clue.

Lets see your answer.

God knows everything, so because of that is all the problems his fault?


Then explain why if you agree with it.

While your at it, ANSWER MY QUESTION

Everything you just said is again, your belief, nothing else, with no relevance whatsoever to other people's reality.

Bubby, Bubby, Bubby. I awaken and you've been up to your tricks again, spewing the same incessant poppycock.


>>>>See Satan does not have to "win" souls, they are already going to Hell with him.<<<<


What am I to do with you, Bubby? You obviously didn't read my 4 step program for you to follow. Step #1 - STOP TALKING. Why must you go on so? Is your head always overflowing? Does it not have an OFF switch?



Bubby, I am sad and sorry to tell you this, but this ain't a binary universe of in or out, saved or lost, heaven or hell, good or bad. It is in your tiny little bwain, but that's because you are a slave to duality - a common condition among young souls ensnared by 3D. You see qualitative separation where there is none because you need so desperately to make sense of the variances to life - and you have to make damn sure you end OK in LaLa land, when there is none. We continue on forever, Bubby. No stopping point or eternal parking place - although your bwain seems pretty well parked for this incarnation.


Try not to talk, Bubby. I know it's hard. But try.

Okay, Okay, you win - I'll "ANSWER YOUR QUESTION". Please don't waterboard me!
I'm defective and probably do deserve hell. Fortunately, Christ Jesus paid my debt at the cross as my Advocate. As I learn to deny myself and walk in His newness of life, I'm changed from the hard-ass church-trooper I once was into a functional, empathetic human being that people can actually bear to interact with, believer and non-believer alike.

Your Monumental Fail lies within your untouchable belief that God - the God of Love who never fails - is somehow unable or uwilling to keep people from plunging into an unending abyss of eternal torture. . .despite repeated promises that His mercy never ends and that Christ will become all in all, and despite the complete absence of your beloved eternal hellfire in the old testament scriptures. Even unbelievers clearly see the illogic of such a scenario. It's a bitter swamp of contradiction that people don't want any part of. That's why "witnessing" is so hard. Can a woman forget her nursing child, that she fails to have compassion on her offspring? No mother of with even a marginal heart would abandon her child to a fate of endless burning misery. Yet, you and your pagan-brainwashed hoard preach that God will do this a trillion times over, and praise him for it.

You've placed your faith in scriptures that have been leavened, against the advice of your Redeemer.
Your statement that if hell is not real the whole thing is a sham] makes me ask: Is that all you're getting out of your alleged walk with Christ? He's just a fire marshall on standby for when you pass away? Are you suggesting that if hell were not real, you'd have no reason not to chuck the whole thing and walk away? You're in this just to save your ass, and not because God is truly worth knowing merely because He exists?

*You* never have a response as to what to make of promises such as "He gave himself a ransom for all to be testified in due time" or "As in Adam all have died, so in Christ all shall be made alive". Are you too comfy hunched over your toxic mistranslated verses featuring the idolized English word "hell" to see(k) any good news in there? Do you ask Jesus whether you can call down fire on people who wanna play ball your way? To such a heart, He responds "You totally don't get it."

You might benefit from climbing up out of the church for a while and living among normal people instead of hidden inside a bomb shelter. You'll realize they aren't demonic as you think, and that you're not quite as you thought, either ;)

Come to think of it, Christians at large might want to examine how functional they are without their book at hand. Spend a period trusting him to guide you and teach your heart without pages of words to refer to. Whether we're actually becoming a new creature should become fairly evident. Typically, non-believers dont "hate" us because of the Gospel - it's because we're incongruent, deformed finger-pointers who can't be reasoned with because we think we've arrived and have closed our ears because anybody opposing us is automatically the devil.


Less Pharisee, Bob. More Lamb.

Hmm, because it don't exist for starters. secondly things are already hellish here on earth and if he would subject us to hell in both worlds then he's a douche.

You're saying that faith is salvation. You're saying that God gives everybody faith. Then you say that out of all those people with faith, many of them go to hell.

Funny sort of faith and salvation you're selling there, preacher. You are telling people that people with faith still go to hell because they made the wrong choice. You're saying that God sends people with faith to hell.

For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. (1 Corinthians 15:22)

there are things worse than hell


like being a ghost


they did not merit to go to Hell


hell is like a shower

get cleaned


the thing is what is for you next

hope you got something good

becouse thats what eternal life and Heaven is all about

do something Holy while you still can

there is no man who so not sin

but try you best

and

do good

Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. (Romans 9:18)

As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. (Romans 9:33)

For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. (Romans 12:3)

For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. (Romans 10:10)

And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world. Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. (1 John 4:14-15)

Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else. I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear. (Isaiah 45:22-23)

For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe. These things command and teach. (1 Timothy 4:10-11)

And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. (1 John 2:2)

And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. John 12:47

That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:10-11)

Amen.
Maranatha!

Amen!

Ramen!

Are you wanting to be fried up into Ramen?

Tossed on the wok and stir fired up?

Asking for a side dish of noodles?

Or letting everyone know that noodles is in you head?


Because that will not be what prevents you from going to hell.