Southern Baptist V JW's debate on Hell

[Deeje]

Since you want to keep up with this:

Yes, I think its important....I have created this new thread as I don't want to keep derailing the other one....

God does punish the wicked eternally. Matthew 25:46 records Jesus saying just that "And these shall go away into everlasting punishment."

Death is a punishment...the highest penalty paid under God's law. Eternal death is eternal punishment.

John 3:16, so often quoted in church..."For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life." (NASB)

What is contrasted with eternal life here? Those not believing in the son will "perish". What does this word mean in any dictionary definition?

According to Strongs Concordance, the word in Greek is "apollymi" which means.....

to destroy

1. to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin
   
2. render useless
   
3. to kill

Which = Eternal death.

You say God does not punish people eternally, but God is an angry and jealous god, and Deuteronomy 32:16 reminds us that "They provoked him to jealousy ... provoked they him to anger."

Under God's law, the punishment always fits the crime. The highest penalty there was....was death. There were laws governing what was a capital offense and things that were lesser crimes requiring compensation to a victim...never was punishment something that never ended. There were no jails or incarceration under Israel's laws. There was no need. Repentance and rehabilitation were always the goal. No one was ever punished for the sake of punishment.

Acts 24:15....Paul said of his fellow Jews...

"And I have hope toward God, which hope these men also look forward to, that there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous."(NASB)

God's anger is justified when humans break his laws and do harm to others. The "jealousy" that God expresses is not the petty jealously felt by humans over nothing...it is the feeling of betrayal that a husband or wife feels when a mate treats them with contempt, doing what they know will cause their spouse pain and heartache. This is a "Godly jealousy" (2 Corinthians 11:2-3)

You are trying to obscure all the warnings of Hell, trying to make it seem like God is not the stern judge the Bible describes him as, and you do this even though there are very many verses that indicate that Hell is real and literal, such as 2 Peter 2:4 where Paul writes that God even sends sinful Angels to Hell

Um...no they don't. There are no sinful angels in "hell" at all....there are only dead sinful humans who are unconscious like Lazarus..."sleeping". (John 11:11-14) Those in hades are released...resurrected. (Revelation 20:13) There is no eternal suffering...only eternal death.

Even those who suffered the death penalty were still in line for a resurrection. The thief hung alongside Jesus, for example, was promised "paradise" not heaven. (Luke 23:43) He will be among the unrighteous ones brought back to life under Messiah's Kingdom.

In 2 Peter 2:4, Peter speaks of "Tarʹta·rus" which is mistranslated as "hell". It is no such thing. It is a condition of abasement or restraint that curbed the power and abilities of rebel spirits. Spiritual darkness was all they had from the time when God sent them back to the spirit realm in Noah's day. (Jude 6; 1 Peter 3:19-20)

and Mark 9:43 where Jesus says "...it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched."

This "hell" is "gehenna" and it doesn't mean what you think it does....Christendom's "hell" is nothing like the "gehenna" that Jesus alluded to. If you use a bad translation you will never arrive at the truth.

Gehenna was used metaphorically by Jesus because the Jews knew what "gehenna" was. They had no notion of 'heaven and hell' as opposite destinations, so Jesus was certainly not talking about a place where conscious souls are tortured. The Jewish belief was that people 'slept' in their graves awaiting the promised resurrection. (Ecclesiastes 9:5-6; 10; John 5:28-29)

"Gehenna" was the city's garbage dump where the carcasses of dead animals and even executed criminals could find themselves thrown into the flames for disposal. Nothing alive ever went into gehenna. It was a symbol of everlasting destruction, not everlasting torture. The fires were kept burning day and night with the addition of brimstone (sulfur) and what the flames missed, the maggots finished off. No Jew wanted to end up in a place from which God would not resurrect them. They had no belief in an afterlife until much later so this belief does not come from Jesus or the Bible.

Back to you....

If you want to keep going I have plenty more.

So have I.....and over 40 years of Bible study under my belt....lets go....

 

[danieldemol]

Ecclesiastes 9:5-6 doesn’t agree with Jehovah’s witness’ view of the afterlife

 

[Deeje]

Ecclesiastes 9:5-6 doesn’t agree with Jehovah’s witness’ view of the afterlife

Care to elaborate on why you would say this. Since Eccl 9:5-6 agrees completely with what we believe about the afterlife...what is it that you think we believe?

 

[David T]

Yes, I think its important....I have created this new thread as I don't want to keep derailing the other one....



Death is a punishment...the highest penalty paid under God's law. Eternal death is eternal punishment.

John 3:16, so often quoted in church..."For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life." (NASB)

What is contrasted with eternal life here? Those not believing in the son will "perish". What does this word mean in any dictionary definition?

According to Strongs Concordance, the word in Greek is "apollymi" which means.....

to destroy

1. to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin
2. render useless
3. to kill

Which = Eternal death.



Under God's law, the punishment always fits the crime. The highest penalty there was....was death. There were laws governing what was a capital offense and things that were lesser crimes requiring compensation to a victim...never was punishment something that never ended. There were no jails or incarceration under Israel's laws. There was no need. Repentance and rehabilitation were always the goal. No one was ever punished for the sake of punishment.

Acts 24:15....Paul said of his fellow Jews...

"And I have hope toward God, which hope these men also look forward to, that there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous."(NASB)

God's anger is justified when humans break his laws and do harm to others. The "jealousy" that God expresses is not the petty jealously felt by humans over nothing...it is the feeling of betrayal that a husband or wife feels when a mate treats them with contempt, doing what they know will cause their spouse pain and heartache. This is a "Godly jealousy" (2 Corinthians 11:2-3)



Um...no they don't. There are no sinful angels in "hell" at all....there are only dead sinful humans who are unconscious like Lazarus..."sleeping". (John 11:11-14) Those in hades are released...resurrected. (Revelation 20:13) There is no eternal suffering...only eternal death.

Even those who suffered the death penalty were still in line for a resurrection. The thief hung alongside Jesus, for example, was promised "paradise" not heaven. (Luke 23:43) He will be among the unrighteous ones brought back to life under Messiah's Kingdom.

In 2 Peter 2:4, Peter speaks of "Tarʹta·rus" which is mistranslated as "hell". It is no such thing. It is a condition of abasement or restraint that curbed the power and abilities of rebel spirits. Spiritual darkness was all they had from the time when God sent them back to the spirit realm in Noah's day. (Jude 6; 1 Peter 3:19-20)



This "hell" is "gehenna" and it doesn't mean what you think it does....Christendom's "hell" is nothing like the "gehenna" that Jesus alluded to. If you use a bad translation you will never arrive at the truth.

Gehenna was used metaphorically by Jesus because the Jews knew what "gehenna" was. They had no notion of 'heaven and hell' as opposite destinations, so Jesus was certainly not talking about a place where conscious souls are tortured. The Jewish belief was that people 'slept' in their graves awaiting the promised resurrection. (Ecclesiastes 9:5-6; 10; John 5:28-29)

"Gehenna" was the city's garbage dump where the carcasses of dead animals and even executed criminals could find themselves thrown into the flames for disposal. Nothing alive ever went into gehenna. It was a symbol of everlasting destruction, not everlasting torture. The fires were kept burning day and night with the addition of brimstone (sulfur) and what the flames missed, the maggots finished off. No Jew wanted to end up in a place from which God would not resurrect them. They had no belief in an afterlife until much later so this belief does not come from Jesus or the Bible.

Back to you....



So have I.....and over 40 years of Bible study under my belt....lets go....

An idiot can have an eternity of bible reading so i would say you have an eternity of stupidity ahead of you. Stupidity most certainly exists as the dominate paradigm in religion and thats a fact..

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Yes, I think its important....I have created this new thread as I don't want to keep derailing the other one....



Death is a punishment...the highest penalty paid under God's law. Eternal death is eternal punishment.

John 3:16, so often quoted in church..."For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life." (NASB)

What is contrasted with eternal life here? Those not believing in the son will "perish". What does this word mean in any dictionary definition?

According to Strongs Concordance, the word in Greek is "apollymi" which means.....

to destroy

1. to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin
2. render useless
3. to kill

Which = Eternal death.



Under God's law, the punishment always fits the crime. The highest penalty there was....was death. There were laws governing what was a capital offense and things that were lesser crimes requiring compensation to a victim...never was punishment something that never ended. There were no jails or incarceration under Israel's laws. There was no need. Repentance and rehabilitation were always the goal. No one was ever punished for the sake of punishment.

Acts 24:15....Paul said of his fellow Jews...

"And I have hope toward God, which hope these men also look forward to, that there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous."(NASB)

God's anger is justified when humans break his laws and do harm to others. The "jealousy" that God expresses is not the petty jealously felt by humans over nothing...it is the feeling of betrayal that a husband or wife feels when a mate treats them with contempt, doing what they know will cause their spouse pain and heartache. This is a "Godly jealousy" (2 Corinthians 11:2-3)



Um...no they don't. There are no sinful angels in "hell" at all....there are only dead sinful humans who are unconscious like Lazarus..."sleeping". (John 11:11-14) Those in hades are released...resurrected. (Revelation 20:13) There is no eternal suffering...only eternal death.

Even those who suffered the death penalty were still in line for a resurrection. The thief hung alongside Jesus, for example, was promised "paradise" not heaven. (Luke 23:43) He will be among the unrighteous ones brought back to life under Messiah's Kingdom.

In 2 Peter 2:4, Peter speaks of "Tarʹta·rus" which is mistranslated as "hell". It is no such thing. It is a condition of abasement or restraint that curbed the power and abilities of rebel spirits. Spiritual darkness was all they had from the time when God sent them back to the spirit realm in Noah's day. (Jude 6; 1 Peter 3:19-20)



This "hell" is "gehenna" and it doesn't mean what you think it does....Christendom's "hell" is nothing like the "gehenna" that Jesus alluded to. If you use a bad translation you will never arrive at the truth.

Gehenna was used metaphorically by Jesus because the Jews knew what "gehenna" was. They had no notion of 'heaven and hell' as opposite destinations, so Jesus was certainly not talking about a place where conscious souls are tortured. The Jewish belief was that people 'slept' in their graves awaiting the promised resurrection. (Ecclesiastes 9:5-6; 10; John 5:28-29)

"Gehenna" was the city's garbage dump where the carcasses of dead animals and even executed criminals could find themselves thrown into the flames for disposal. Nothing alive ever went into gehenna. It was a symbol of everlasting destruction, not everlasting torture. The fires were kept burning day and night with the addition of brimstone (sulfur) and what the flames missed, the maggots finished off. No Jew wanted to end up in a place from which God would not resurrect them. They had no belief in an afterlife until much later so this belief does not come from Jesus or the Bible.

Back to you....



So have I.....and over 40 years of Bible study under my belt....lets go....

Do you really want to keep up with this silly debate? You might as well debate a Catholic over whether or not Mary deserves her elevated status. To them, you are wrong. When it comes to Hell, Southern Baptists and many other denominations say you're wrong.
That is exactly why there are so many denominations of Christianity. They all read the same book, but they can't reach the same conclusions and interpretations. That's the point I've been trying to make - each and every denomination claims they have it right, but none of them have anything to definitively prove their position correct over the others.

 

[Deeje]

Do you really want to keep up with this silly debate?

I think it would be helpful to others in your situation to dispel unnecessary fears. If the Bible really does teach about this place then lets use the Bible to find out.

You might as well debate a Catholic over whether or not Mary deserves her elevated status. To them, you are wrong. When it comes to Hell, Southern Baptists and many other denominations say you're wrong.

Then can we put God's word to the test and see if I'm wrong?....I can use scripture to show that Mary's "elevated status" in Catholicism is based on pagan Mother Worship that began in Babylon thousands of years before Mary was even born. Catholics may not believe it but they can't deny scripture that proves that Mary was just a sinful human like the rest of us.....devout and faithful? Definitely.....but not immaculately conceived....and certainly NOT the Mother of God.

That is exactly why there are so many denominations of Christianity. They all read the same book, but they can't reach the same conclusions and interpretations.

There is a reason for that...don't you want to explore the reasons why there are so many all claiming to teach the truth? The Bible tells us....and it makes sense.

That's the point I've been trying to make - each and every denomination claims they have it right, but none of them have anything to definitively prove their position correct over the others.

Oh, but the Bible speaks for itself if you let it.

Am I left to assume that all those other scriptures you have to support the Southern Baptist's claim that the Bible teaches a hell of eternal torment in flames was just bluster? Produce them and lets take them apart...what have you got to lose apart from your fear?

Do you not want to have the scriptures explained to you in a reasonable way so that this ridiculous topic can be put into "gehenna" once and for all...or do you want to continue being fearful of what someone told you would be your destiny? I would have thought you'd welcome putting a hose on hell....sorry if I misjudged you.

Others can feel free to join the conversation if they have something of substance to contribute....

Since this was supposed to be a debate, those who have nothing of substance to contribute, please refrain from comment. Sniping accomplishes nothing.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think it would be helpful to others in your situation to dispel unnecessary fears. If the Bible really does teach about this place then lets use the Bible to find out.

I gave you some passages that explicitly mention hell, fire, and eternal punishment. But you dismissed them.
And you seemed to have forgotten where I pointed out that acknowledgement of "homosexual behaviors" as a sin as taught by the Jehovah's Witnesses still carries with it a very deep sting. And the Jehovah's Witness' position ignores Matthew 5:28 when Jesus said to look upon someone with lust is to commit adultery in one's heart. So even if a gay man doesn't have sex wit a man, according to Jesus, just his attraction to men, to look upon a man with lust, it doesn't matter if he's still a virgin he would still be guilty of that sin.

There is a reason for that...don't you want to explore the reasons why there are so many all claiming to teach the truth? The Bible tells us....and it makes sense.

It makes since why Martin Luther had his 95 Theses - because there are so many contradictions in the Bible that Catholicism left itself open for such a schism. And it's the same reason there have been countless schisms since.

Oh, but the Bible speaks for itself if you let it.

It speaks for itself that these thousands of Christian denominations all read the same Bible but come to different conclusions. This has nothing to do with an "incorrect faith," but the fact you can make the case Jesus said to uphold the OT law down to the dot and tittle, or that to say so is to miss the point of Jesus' teachings of love. You can make the case for determination, as Calvin did, you can make the case for free will.

 

[Deeje]

I gave you some passages that explicitly mention hell, fire, and eternal punishment. But you dismissed them.

Dismissed them? NO! I merely explained why they were not supporting hellfire or eternal torment. You dismissed the explanation. That is of course your choice....but did you even read the scriptures to see if they were correct? Do you need the Southern Baptist Church to be right or is it that you need JW's to be wrong?....I can't tell.

And you seemed to have forgotten where I pointed out that acknowledgement of "homosexual behaviors" as a sin as taught by the Jehovah's Witnesses still carries with it a very deep sting.

Well, it isn't just taught by Jehovah's Witnesses....it is in God's word very plainly. We didn't invent this OK? If there is a sting, then its from God...not us. He will not bend his moral laws to accommodate human lust. Love is not sex....but sex can be a very deep and emotional, (even spiritual) expression of the marriage bond. Without God's sanction it is like the forbidden fruit...tempting but not ours to take.

And the Jehovah's Witness' position ignores Matthew 5:28 when Jesus said to look upon someone with lust is to commit adultery in one's heart. So even if a gay man doesn't have sex wit a man, according to Jesus, just his attraction to men, to look upon a man with lust, it doesn't matter if he's still a virgin he would still be guilty of that sin.

You've got that all wrong too. It implies that if you "keep looking" (not just a glance) at someone because lust has begun to emerge in your heart, its the fact that one allows the desire to grow that's the problem. Like it says in James 1:13-15...."When under trial, let no one say: “I am being tried by God.” For with evil things God cannot be tried, nor does he himself try anyone. 14 But each one is tried by being drawn out and enticed by his own desire. 15 Then the desire, when it has become fertile, gives birth to sin; in turn sin, when it has been carried out, brings forth death."

Do you see what the problem is? Its our own desires being given free reign. But sin brings forth death....not eternal suffering.

It makes since why Martin Luther had his 95 Theses - because there are so many contradictions in the Bible that Catholicism left itself open for such a schism. And it's the same reason there have been countless schisms since.

Actually there are no contradictions in the Bible...the contradictions come from putting the wrong interpretation on scripture. It is the those faulty interpretations that contradict scripture.

If you believe that the Bible is God's word, authored by the one powerful enough to create the universe, then you think it would be too difficult to preserve the words in his own book? God is never wrong! Humans are seldom right.

It speaks for itself that these thousands of Christian denominations all read the same Bible but come to different conclusions.

They all have a common enemy.....one who plants "fake Christianity" (weeds) to sucker people into believing that they are worshipping God correctly, but finding out at the judgment that the devil has steered them onto the wrong path. (Matthew 7:13-14 Matthew 7:21-23) Most can't stand to tread the cramped and narrow road because its a difficult path...they want the easy way that needs no sacrifice.

This has nothing to do with an "incorrect faith," but the fact you can make the case Jesus said to uphold the OT law down to the dot and tittle, or that to say so is to miss the point of Jesus' teachings of love. You can make the case for determination, as Calvin did, you can make the case for free will.

I am a firm believer in free will....if God didn't make us free willed beings, then why do think people have so many choices?

Someone asked Jesus...."Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37 He said to him: “‘You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind.’ 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this: ‘You must love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets." (Matthew 22:36-40)

Jesus' teachings on love were the very foundations of the law. They came from his Father after all.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You've got that all wrong too. It implies that if you "keep looking" (not just a glance) at someone because lust has begun to emerge in your heart, its the fact that one allows the desire to grow that's the problem.

What do you think the basis of romantic attraction is? If it's not there, you have a friendship at best.

Do you see what the problem is? Its our own desires being given free reign. But sin brings forth death....not eternal suffering.

Do you see that you're adding into what Jesus said? He said nothing about how long you look, but that if you look upon someone with lust in your heart. Homosexuals feels it towards the same sex as heterosexuals feel towards to the opposite sex.
You also keep insisting Jesus meant something other than what he said when he spoke of people being cast in furnaces, fires, and darkness. This also opens the can of worms of if this part over here is metaphor, then what else is metaphor? By what measure is it decided what is literal and what isn't?

If you believe that the Bible is God's word, authored by the one powerful enough to create the universe, then you think it would be too difficult to preserve the words in his own book? God is never wrong! Humans are seldom right.

Apparently, as you are blaming translation errors but also saying god won't find it difficult to preserve his own words.

They all have a common enemy.....one who plants "fake Christianity" (weeds) to sucker people into believing that they are worshipping God correctly, but finding out at the judgment that the devil has steered them onto the wrong path.

And they all say that about Jehovah's Witnesses, because JW interpretation of scripture is incorrect. And that's the entire issue behind this whole debate (and because you doubted I was ever actually a Christian). There is no way to validate which denomination, if any of them, have it right. All of them have their own passages to support their positions, just as you do.
At the end of the day, they are all Christians, and most of them worship Jesus, except those such as yourself who deny of the divinity of Christ. And tons of Christians will say you are wrong and deny a very core and fundamental fact of the Bible.

I am a firm believer in free will.

It is demonstrably false.

Someone asked Jesus...."Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37 He said to him: “‘You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind.’ 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this: ‘You must love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets." (Matthew 22:36-40)

Jesus' teachings on love were the very foundations of the law. They came from his Father after all.

Loving god includes loving God enough to follow his rules, from cover to cover. That what most Baptists and tons more denominations will tell you.
And even though Jesus gave stern warnings against judging people (in this case, judging that they do not actually worship Jehovah), you are still doing it.

 

[danieldemol]

Care to elaborate on why you would say this. Since Eccl 9:5-6 agrees completely with what we believe about the afterlife...what is it that you think we believe?

Actually 9:5-6 denies any sort of an afterlife, so it can't agree with your version of the afterlife.

According to the JW Bible it states, For the living know* that they will die,+ but the dead know nothing at all,+ nor do they have any more reward,* because all memory of them is forgotten.+ 6 Also, their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished, and they no longer have any share in what is done under the sun.

So if you believe that the true believers will be rewarded with eternal life after being resurected, you cannnot logically simultaneously believe that they no longer have any more reward, and if you believe they no longer have a share in what is done under the sun, you cannot logically simultaneously believe they will return to earth, which is obviously under the sun. That is to say, you can believe that these all are true at the same time, just that your belief will be illogical.

To recap, JWs believe in a type of afterlife, and a plain reading of the text shows that Ecclesiastes 9:5-6 denies any sort of afterlife whatsoever. So what is it will you be rewarded or won't you be?![/end rhetorical question]

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Ecclesiastes 9:5-6 doesn’t agree with Jehovah’s witness’ view of the afterlife

@danieldemol , Solomon used that phrase, "under the Sun", over 20 times... It's always in a bad connotation, as in "all [Solomon's] work was futile under the Sun", or "there's nothing new under the Sun."

I found this posted by someone else interested in the phrase...
What does "Under the Sun" mean in Ecclesiastes?:
**I noticed that the Teacher uses the phrase "under the sun" more than 20 times in Ecclesiastes. I have always understood this to simply mean "on earth".....But I began to wonder today if there is more to it. I was listening to Ravi Zacharius' message "What is Worthwhile Under the Sun" today. He said it was a Hebrew idiom meaning, figuratively, "life without God." **

And that's what we have today, a world alienated from God. But at the future time when the Resurrection occurs -- "All those in the memorial tombs will.....come out" (John 5:28-29), life without God will be a thing of the past: 'the tent of God will be with men.' -- Revelation 21:3-4

 

[Oeste]

Actually 9:5-6 denies any sort of an afterlife, so it can't agree with your version of the afterlife.

According to the JW Bible it states, For the living know* that they will die,+ but the dead know nothing at all,+ nor do they have any more reward,* because all memory of them is forgotten.+ 6 Also, their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished, and they no longer have any share in what is done under the sun.

So if you believe that the true believers will be rewarded with eternal life after being resurected, you cannnot logically simultaneously believe that they no longer have any more reward, and if you believe they no longer have a share in what is done under the sun, you cannot logically simultaneously believe they will return to earth, which is obviously under the sun. That is to say, you can believe that these all are true at the same time, just that your belief will be illogical.

Agreed.

It's a favorite verse of JW's to cite, but they only cite half the verse. Since "the dead know nothing at all" is a statement of truth then "nor do they have any more reward" equally true.

Yet we never hear JW's shouting "The dead have no reward!" when discussing the condition of the dead.

 

[Deeje]

Actually 9:5-6 denies any sort of an afterlife, so it can't agree with your version of the afterlife.

According to the JW Bible it states, For the living know* that they will die,+ but the dead know nothing at all,+ nor do they have any more reward,* because all memory of them is forgotten.+ 6 Also, their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished, and they no longer have any share in what is done under the sun.

Remember that this is Jewish scripture. There was no belief in an immortal soul or an afterlife in heaven such as Christendom adopted.

This is clearly a translation issue. According to Strongs, the "reward" mentioned in this verse is actually "wages". They no longer work for wages.
It has nothing to do with the reward of everlasting life.

The "share" they have "under the sun" is life in this world.....Jews looked forward to a resurrection under Messiah's kingdom on earth....something they expected in the future. They never had an expectation of heaven nor did they believe that life continued after death.

So if you believe that the true believers will be rewarded with eternal life after being resurected, you cannnot logically simultaneously believe that they no longer have any more reward, and if you believe they no longer have a share in what is done under the sun, you cannot logically simultaneously believe they will return to earth, which is obviously under the sun. That is to say, you can believe that these all are true at the same time, just that your belief will be illogical.

Understanding Jewish belief at that time, solves the seeming dilemma that Christendom's beliefs created.

To recap, JWs believe in a type of afterlife, and a plain reading of the text shows that Ecclesiastes 9:5-6 denies any sort of afterlife whatsoever. So what is it will you be rewarded or won't you be?![/end rhetorical question]

Not a rhetorical question at all because it is based on a false reading of the scripture.
The Bible's teaching of a resurrection is nothing like the teaching of an immortal soul.

When you die, your body is returned to the earth, just as God told Adam. (Genesis 3:19) Death is likened to sleep by Jesus. When he raised his friend Lazarus from the dead, he told his disciples.....“Lazʹa·rus our friend has fallen asleep, but I am traveling there to awaken him.” 12 The disciples then said to him: “Lord, if he is sleeping, he will get well.” 13 Jesus, however, had spoken about his death. But they imagined he was speaking about taking rest in sleep. 14 Then Jesus said to them plainly: “Lazʹa·rus has died". (John 11:11-14)

If Lazarus had gone to a better place, what was the point of bringing him back to this life, only to die again? Was Jesus doing him a favour? He was, if you look at what Jews believed...but not if you adopt Christendom views.

There is no part of man that survives death. God determines who is worthy to regain their life. Jesus will perform the resurrections. (John 5:28-29)

The voices of ignorance always end up with egg on their face.
Research is not a difficult thing these days....if people look beyond their own indoctrination, they can find a lot that is enlightening.

 

[Deeje]

What do you think the basis of romantic attraction is? If it's not there, you have a friendship at best.

Exactly. Mere attraction can be fleeting unless it is groomed. Relationships do not develop over a glance at someone we may find physically attractive....it requires time and communication to develop into something physical. (For most people at least)

"Looking" at a person is not the same as 'continuing to look' at that person with a view to taking the relationship further. If that person is not someone with whom we can (in all conscience) pursue a relationship ( someone else's spouse e.g.) then we have no business "looking" in the first place. Why does gender even enter into this equation? If God makes our rules, then we don't start what we can't finish without breaking God's laws. It's a choice.

Do you see that you're adding into what Jesus said? He said nothing about how long you look, but that if you look upon someone with lust in your heart.

See above.....I am not adding anything. Lust doesn't even need a real person to incite it......the internet is full of disgusting images that elicit lust. None of that is anything to be proud of as human beings...supposedly the only creatures with a moral sense. Even animals do not engage is such deviant and disgusting behavior.

Homosexuals feels it towards the same sex as heterosexuals feel towards to the opposite sex.

But as previously mentioned, whether it needs to be acted on is a choice. Being attracted is only the beginning....how it ends is up to us.

You also keep insisting Jesus meant something other than what he said when he spoke of people being cast in furnaces, fires, and darkness. This also opens the can of worms of if this part over here is metaphor, then what else is metaphor? By what measure is it decided what is literal and what isn't?

Since there was nothing in the Hebrew scriptures to even suggest that a fiery hell existed, then because he spoke only to Jews, they understood his words to be metaphoric. Fire was always symbolic of complete destruction.....like Gehenna. Jews knew that Gehenna meant something entirely different to what Christendom came to believe in later centuries.

Apparently, as you are blaming translation errors but also saying god won't find it difficult to preserve his own words.

If you take the entirety of scripture into account, you will see that even the mistranslation of certain words cannot alter the Bible's overall message.

I studied with the KJV and saw the Bible's message clearly, even though it is one of the worst translation for bias in existence. Research is all that is needed to correct misconceptions.

And they all say that about Jehovah's Witnesses, because JW interpretation of scripture is incorrect. And that's the entire issue behind this whole debate (and because you doubted I was ever actually a Christian). There is no way to validate which denomination, if any of them, have it right. All of them have their own passages to support their positions, just as you do.

If you recall....Jesus and his apostles experienced exactly the same response from their fellow Jews. Being "different" is important because of what Jesus taught. He was presenting something "different" to what Jews had accepted for centuries as acceptable worship. In the parable of the 'wheat and the weeds' it wasn't until the "harvest" time that the reapers could discern the difference....now very obvious. We are living in the time of the harvest.....if we are not different, then we are weeds.

Daniel foretold that at this "time of the end", God was going to cleanse and refine his worshippers by supplying an abundance of knowledge. He said that the wicked would continue in their error, obviously not seeing the need to clean up their worship of all the false doctrines that had crept in over many centuries. (Daniel 12 4; 9-10) Why cleanse and refine what has not become contaminated with impurities?

We believe that Christendom is simply the weeds in different containers under the same belief system.
The things they hold in common far outweighs their differences.

At the end of the day, they are all Christians, and most of them worship Jesus, except those such as yourself who deny of the divinity of Christ. And tons of Christians will say you are wrong and deny a very core and fundamental fact of the Bible.

Yes, worshipping Jesus is exactly what the problem is....Jesus is not God and so the devil has people breaking the first commandment, NOT to have any other God but Jehovah. (Exodus 20:3) Jesus is not Jehovah....he never was. The first Christians would never have believed that blasphemy.

It is demonstrably false.

Please demonstrate it then.

Loving god includes loving God enough to follow his rules, from cover to cover. That what most Baptists and tons more denominations will tell you.

But they don't actually practice what they preach. If they followed God's commands they would never have put Jesus in place of his Father....they would never have become part of this world's political agendas. (James 4:4) To become part of this world's "kingdom", which the Bible clearly identifies as being controlled by the devil (1 John 5:19; John 18:36) is to be on the opposite side to the one Christ's true disciples stand on. It was not going to make those disciples popular with the world or its supporters. (John 15:18-21) Its that difference again.

And even though Jesus gave stern warnings against judging people (in this case, judging that they do not actually worship Jehovah), you are still doing it.

We have to use judgment every day over a multitude of issues. What Jesus warned against was judging another person as worthy of life....or not. That is Jesus' job. He is the judge, but as to what true worship is...that is a judgment that we MUST make individually....our life and future depend on it.

That is how we view things, and that is how we judge any religion that purports to represent the teachings of Christ. It is the Bible that condemns them...not us. All we do is tell the truth and people are free to make their own judgments.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Even animals do not engage is such deviant and disgusting behavior.

Various monkeys are known for jacking off while people at zoos watch, and have basically more or less used frogs as sex toys. Dogs hump their litter mates.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

But they don't actually practice what they preach. If they followed God's commands they would never have put Jesus in place of his Father....they would never have become part of this world's political agendas.

Don't you see how this is an endless circular debate? All we can ever do is throw Bible verses back and forth and it's nothing more than a "I'm right, no I'm right" debate.
And, also, it is dishonest to tell someone who used to worship Jehovah they didn't. What you don't have is the experience of being something that god strongly disapproves of, and having to deal with that. And that is the other issue, that being told no over some things is very damaging - even the Jehovah's Witnesses, you may as well be telling to not eat, drink, or breathe. Being shunned by threats of flames or oblivion are still threats of being shunned and cut out.

 

[Deeje]

Various monkeys are known for jacking off while people at zoos watch, and have basically more or less used frogs as sex toys. Dogs hump their litter mates.

These are creatures with no moral sense......therefore not going against God's laws which do not appy to them. It is certainly not conduct that is common among animals. It has more to do with instinct than deliberate actions.

If we judge their conduct by human standards, then we can be shocked (or even amused) but when humans emulate what even animals would not do, then we have pause for concern.

 

[Deeje]

Don't you see how this is an endless circular debate? All we can ever do is throw Bible verses back and forth and it's nothing more than a "I'm right, no I'm right" debate.

Putting Bible verses up for evaluation is important for those who read these threads. They may not mean much to you but they might be vital for those who may be unfamiliar with what the Bible teaches. Everything is a learning curve. Debates give people food for thought......both sides of an issue are discussed.

And, also, it is dishonest to tell someone who used to worship Jehovah they didn't. What you don't have is the experience of being something that god strongly disapproves of, and having to deal with that.

As I have said SW, it is our actions that determine how we are judged by God...and his judgment is the only one we need to be concerned with. If you were worshipping Jehovah, then you could not ever believe in hellfire. Nothing in the Bible says that there is even a conscious part of humans that survives death, let alone being able to be tortured in some fictitious place invented by the devil.

And that is the other issue, that being told no over some things is very damaging - even the Jehovah's Witnesses, you may as well be telling to not eat, drink, or breathe. Being shunned by threats of flames or oblivion are still threats of being shunned and cut out.

If we told you not to eat poisoned food....drink contaminated water...or breathe polluted air, would we be doing you a disservice? Would that be a threat or would it be trying to help you to avoid illness? Spiritual illness is just as important in this issue.

You have to decide what conduct brings God's condemnation and what brings his blessing. We can't blame God or his teachings for our own conduct....or expect him to alter his laws to accommodate behavior that he clearly condemns just because it is our particular genetic predisposition to desire what God says we have no right to.

Has he left us to suffer because our natural inclinations contradict his laws? No! He teaches us how to rise above those inclinations and to serve him in what is left of this wicked system that is presently governing the world. God promises us a new world where none of these things will even exist. (2 Peter 3:13) To sacrifice forever in that world for the five minutes left in this one is rather short sighted IMO. Like giving up in a marathon, 5 inches from the finish line.

Jehovah teaches us patient endurance in this world so that we can enjoy the new world forever with nothing to cause us torment or anxiety ever again. I believe that any sacrifice is well worth the effort.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If you were worshipping Jehovah, then you could not ever believe in hellfire.

If you were worshiping Jehovah, you wouldn't deny the divinity of Christ.
(see how this works yet?)

 

[Deeje]

If you were worshiping Jehovah, you wouldn't deny the divinity of Christ.
(see how this works yet?)

No I don't, because it is so easy to Biblically prove that Jesus is not Jehovah. There is not one verse that says so. Inference is not proof because I can infer a lot about a lot of things without proving any of it. You can believe the inference, but would you like it used in a court of law against you?

Can you show me any direct statements where Jesus said that he was God? Can you provide any words from God that indicates that he could ever become a human, or that he is three separate parts of one God. Christendom's teachings are not from the Bible.

Your responses are getting thin when you said you had plenty of scripture to debate....where is it? Let the readers decide who is adhering to the Bible and who isn't.

If the SBC is adhering to the Bible in their belief system, then it will be obvious. Present it.