Whatever happened to conviction of sins?

[Jacob]

We may be quick to acknowledge that we are not perfect, and some of us
may even appear to take some pride in it! But if this truth has really
hit us we would not be so quick to proclaim it. Then we would be
unhappy to realise that we are doing many things wrong, and that in
many cases we don't even know whether we are doing right or wrong. It
affected Paul so much that he felt wretched (Ro.7:21-24). He was not
satisfied because he was the top apostle of those days who was setting
up many churches, writing parts of Scripture, doing fantastic
miracles, etc. He felt wretched because he was doing many things
wrong. But his wretchedness was not the kind that discouraged or
depressed him. Knowing he was imperfect and that he was only going to
be imperfect while on earth he pressed on to perfection (Php.3:13;Ac.
24:16).

It is easy to see that we will not really go after becoming more and
more perfect if first of all we are not aware of how imperfect we are
and secondly if that does not bother us. In a sense we are forced to
admit we are imperfect because there are many around us who inform us
about that! But it is not sure if we feel wretched about it.

A great change has taken place in Christianity in our days so that to
feel 'wretched' is not acceptable now. We are so constantly being
reminded about how there is no condemnation for us now, how we have
been accepted by grace just as we are, what our position in Christ is,
how unconditional God's love is towards us, etc., that there is
practically no place for conviction of sin! Certainly we need that
emphasis. But any acknowledgment of 'need' is considered to be
'negative' and to be avoided at any cost! We are, they say, to
preserve our sense of acceptance by rejecting all thoughts that even
hint that we might be lacking something! Many preachers have stopped
talking about hell, judgment, repentance, etc., because they would not
like to hurt anyone's fine feelings! As the Bible says, an enemy has
done this.

When we do wrong we should feel bad about it, shouldn't we? We should
not be pushing aside such feelings of conviction before we have dealt
with our sin by confessing it to God and setting it right with people
(1Jn.1:9). God's unconditional love for us does not mean that He is
blind to our sins. His acceptance does not mean that He tolerates sin.
God hates sin, even if it is His beloved children who are committing
it. The wages of sin is still death, and if we do not claim
forgiveness by acknowledging and confessing it to God, it will still
separate us from Him (Ro.6:23;Is.59:1,2).

On one hand we don't want to get discouraged and feel hopeless because
we have fallen into sin. On the other hand we don't want to treat it
lightly (Ro.6:15). We must protect ourselves from falling into either
of these two cliffs and learn to walk in the middle. We need this
balance in doctrine as well as in experience. Let us press on even
while acknowledging failure.

[shegeek72]

Post by Jacob
Many preachers have stopped
talking about hell, judgment, repentance, etc.,

For good reason-- hell doesn't exist (except in one's mind); the only
religious judgment is self-judgment (God does not judge); it's good to
'repent,' if only to satisfy the urge to lift a burden from our
shoulders.

Post by Jacob
When we do wrong we should feel bad about it, shouldn't we?

Isn't that what a conscience is for?

Post by Jacob
His acceptance does not mean that He tolerates sin.
God hates sin, even if it is His beloved children who are committing
it. The wages of sin is still death, and if we do not claim
forgiveness by acknowledging and confessing it to God, it will still
separate us from Him (Ro.6:23;Is.59:1,2).

A misinterpretation of scripture. This black and white view is based
on an antiquated 'judgment, vengeful' God.
--
Tara's Transgender Resources
http://tarasresources.net

Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.mccchurch.org

[DKleinecke]

Post by shegeek72

Post by Jacob
His acceptance does not mean that He tolerates sin.
God hates sin, even if it is His beloved children who are committing
it. The wages of sin is still death, and if we do not claim
forgiveness by acknowledging and confessing it to God, it will still
separate us from Him (Ro.6:23;Is.59:1,2).

A misinterpretation of scripture. This black and white view is based
on an antiquated 'judgment, vengeful' God.
--

The vengeful God is hardly antiquated. Many people still advocate for
him. Many posters to this group could or will tell you that - if they
bother to.

But it is a misreading of scripture. Combing Paul and Isaiah is not
helpful because they speak from such different contexts. It is Paul
who said that "For sin pays its wage - death. But God's free gift is
eternal life." and it is Isaiah who more or less says the rest but he
says only that "It is your sins that separate you from God when you
try to worship him".

It is not obvious even that Paul, writing in Greek, and (Third?)
Isaiah, speaking in Hebrew, meant the same thing by sin. Isaiah goes
on to list a number of things I would call crimes. Paul nowhere makes
explicit what sin meant to him. But his writings generally imply he is
thinking in moral terms and, I believe, favor the idea that, to him,
sin means rejecting God - not any particular actions.

In one sense the original post was correct. It seems clear that Paul
was very insecure in the sense that he felt he was a great sinner and
that his salvation was hard won. But we must not confuse Paul's
personal psychological problems with a universal statement about
mankind. People, who like Paul, are convinced of their own
unworthiness will always admire a judgmental God.

Nowadays wallowing in one's own unworthiness has largely gone out of
style. Hence there is less talk about damnation and vengeance. But
many people are not ready to give up their old beliefs and follow the
new trendy ones.

[AJA]

Post by DKleinecke
Nowadays wallowing in one's own unworthiness has largely gone out of
style. Hence there is less talk about damnation and vengeance. >

Saying that, I don't count as "trendy" to proclaim a loving God who we are
assured has the very best interests in mind for all mankind. Helfire and
damnation, while one is able to quote chapter and verse about such, is not
the Gospel good news. Christ was with God, St. John records, before the
world (and sin) began. That is the God we worship. I'm quite sure that the
first time a Christian meets a person who is searching doesn't rail on about
sin and damnation on the first meeting. That searcher would run like fury!
I grew up on hellfire sermons and thank God the Light has dawned. Best
leave it to the theologians to work out sin theology. We ordinary
Christians would do well to reflect as best we can the love that is God.

Blessings,
Ann

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by DKleinecke
But it is a misreading of scripture.

Not necessarily. It might not be a misreading if you understand that
even the mere use of the word 'vengeful' in 'vengeful God' is an
anthropomorphism.

Post by DKleinecke
Combing Paul and Isaiah is not helpful because they speak from such
different contexts.

Yes, they do speak "from different contexts", but this does not mean
combining them is _necessarily_ "not helpful". It only means that
'combining' them is difficult. But if done carefully, with full
respect to their respective contexts, you can learn something from it.

Post by DKleinecke
It is Paul who said that "For sin pays its wage - death. But God's
free gift is eternal life." and it is Isaiah who more or less says
the rest but he says only that "It is your sins that separate you
from God when you try to worship him".
It is not obvious even that Paul, writing in Greek, and (Third?)
Isaiah, speaking in Hebrew, meant the same thing by sin.

They didn't even always mean the same thing by the same word. AMARTIA
already has multiple meanings. It can refer to individual trespasses
as well as to the abstract meaning.

Post by DKleinecke
Isaiah goes on to list a number of things I would call crimes. Paul
nowhere makes explicit what sin meant to him. But his writings
generally imply he is thinking in moral terms and, I believe, favor
the idea that, to him, sin means rejecting God - not any particular
actions.

Then what do you believe he implies _is_ the relation between the
abstract idea "rejecting God" and the particular actions?

Post by DKleinecke
In one sense the original post was correct. It seems clear that Paul
was very insecure

No, that is not 'clear' at all. Paul had the confidence of the
righteous as described in Proverbs 3:23 and Pro 10:9:

He that walketh uprightly walketh securely; but he that perverteth his
ways shall be found out. (Pro 10:9 JPS)

Post by DKleinecke
in the sense that he felt he was a great sinner and that his
salvation was hard won.

"Hard won"? Now this is the most amazing misreading of Paul I have
ever seen! No, he did _not_ believe it was "hard won". How could he,
when he wrote the entire epistles of Romans and Galatians to prove it
could not be 'won' in the first place? Salvation is, as you yourself
quoted him saying above, a "free gift".

Post by DKleinecke
But we must not confuse Paul's personal psychological problems

You would be better off not believing he has "personal psychological
problems" in the first place.

Post by DKleinecke
with a universal statement about mankind. People, who like Paul, are
convinced of their own unworthiness will always admire a judgmental
God.

Well now, I suppose I have to take back waht I said about "hard
won". For _this_ misreadin go Paul is even more amazing;)

Post by DKleinecke
Nowadays wallowing in one's own unworthiness has largely gone out of
style.

That 'wallowing' was never the correct interpretation of 'repentance'
in the first place. The irony is that there is a lot more of the
unworthiness now running around.

Post by DKleinecke
Hence there is less talk about damnation and vengeance. But many
people are not ready to give up their old beliefs and follow the new
trendy ones.

Since the "new trendy ones" are worse, it is good that they are
reluctant to give up the old.

[DKleinecke]

Post by AJA

Post by DKleinecke
Nowadays wallowing in one's own unworthiness has largely gone out of
style. Hence there is less talk about damnation and vengeance. >

Saying that, I don't count as "trendy" to proclaim a loving God who we are
assured has the very best interests in mind for all mankind. Helfire and
damnation, while one is able to quote chapter and verse about such, is not
the Gospel good news. Christ was with God, St. John records, before the
world (and sin) began. That is the God we worship. I'm quite sure that the
first time a Christian meets a person who is searching doesn't rail on about
sin and damnation on the first meeting. That searcher would run like fury!
I grew up on hellfire sermons and thank God the Light has dawned. Best
leave it to the theologians to work out sin theology. We ordinary
Christians would do well to reflect as best we can the love that is God.
Blessings,
Ann

Religions are not as self-sufficient as they like to believe. The
thing that anthropologists call culture (not a simple idea - be sure
you understand it before you jump to any conclusions) has, generally
speaking, a more powerful hold over people's minds than does religion.
In fact, it has been concluded that religion is just another facet of
culture - comparable to language or table manners. Since I am a theist
I feel that there is a "real" (not physically) god out there - but I
can see that the form religion takes is largely a creation of culture.

Paul and Isaiah came from very different cultures and, if you bring no
baggage to the discussion, they had very different religions. But
nobody on soc.religion.christian should doubt that they both followed
the same god. A great deal of theological thinking has been wasted
trying to demonstrate that Paul and Isaiah followed the same religion
(at least before Paul started innovating).

Hence we must make a clear distinction where language (or at least
English) does not provide us the tools. On the one hand there is
"religion" - the Bible and the other books, the churches and the other
buildings, the rituals and rule books - and, on the other hand, there
is union with God.

Union with God is timeless and unchanging. God is outside of time.

Religion is a facet of culture that possess a little bit of knowledge
about the union with God. That is, religion is mostly not God-given.
It is a creation of man.

So fashions in religion change.

These days we are into feeling good. So thoughts of our unworthiness
have drifted away. I am inclined to think that the movement toward
self-assurance is part of the general denial that we, mankind, are
headed at top speed toward a disaster that can only be compared to the
destruction of the dinosaurs by the meteor.

But no matter how big a disaster probably not the end of the world.

[r***@yahoo.com]

Post by DKleinecke
Nowadays wallowing in one's own unworthiness has largely gone out of
style. Hence there is less talk about damnation and vengeance. >

Saying that, I don't count as "trendy" to proclaim a loving God who we are=
assured has the very best interests in mind for all mankind. =A0Helfire an=

d

damnation, while one is able to quote chapter and verse about such, is not=
the Gospel good news. =A0Christ was with God, St. John records, before the=
world (and sin) began. =A0That is the God we worship. =A0I'm quite sure th=

at the

first time a Christian meets a person who is searching doesn't rail on abo=

ut

sin and damnation on the first meeting. =A0That searcher would run like fu=

ry!

I grew up on hellfire sermons and thank God the Light has dawned. =A0Best
leave it to the theologians to work out sin theology. =A0We ordinary
Christians would do well to reflect as best we can the love that is God.
Blessings,
Ann

The problem with avoiding sin and damnation is that salvation is
nothing apart from it.
This is why Jesus talked more about hell than heaven....

if you don't have a problem in the first place, then you don't need a
savior.
however the bible is very clear that God sees a very big problem with
our sin.... it removes us from him and that means we are lost and
damned.
we have a savior, because we need to be saved. we need to be saved
because we are lost and doomed on our own.

just thinking about Gods love is not enough, because we innately love
ourselves far more than we love anything else. and when push comes to
shove, we will almost always choose what we want, even when
detrimental to our long term interests or the interests of others. We
are sinners and we must recognize that fact first. only then can we
find rest for our souls in Jesus.

[DKleinecke]

Post by r***@yahoo.com
This is why Jesus talked more about hell than heaven....

Did he indeed?

Aside from the dubious hadith about Dives and Lazarus where does he
speak about either of them? Aside from mere references like th ones
about drinking wine in paradise.

We do not even know from the gospels that the living Jesus (before his
own death) believed in resurrection. However we are reasonably sure
that some of the Jews (those of them called Pharisees as opposed to
those called Sadducees) did believe in resurrection. But this kind of
resurrection was the resurrection on Judgment Day.

We must not confused the symbolic Christ of Revelation with the living
Jesus. There is no evidence that Jesus taught what Revelation says (in
fact, indications are that revelation was new to John). Jesus is
reported as describing the final days in terms similar to those in
Revelation - but not identical. But Jesus' stops before the story
reaches Paradise.

What do people here think Jesus said about either of these subjects? I
mean the living Jesus and not Paul or any other follower and not the
Church. If you want to quote the Gospel of Thomas feel free. I don't
think it adds much.

[A Brown]

Post by r***@yahoo.com
This is why Jesus talked more about hell than heaven....

This is amazing.

I read an article that most people also thought that the saying "God helps
those that help themselves" is also biblical.

I think most people THINK they know whats in the Bible...or they have some
set things they WANT to think are in the bible.

If you could back up the above statement with facts......I'd be interested
in seeing them....however, I believe you are incorrect.

[B]

Post by DKleinecke
What do people here think Jesus said about either of these subjects? I
mean the living Jesus and not Paul or any other follower and not the
Church. If you want to quote the Gospel of Thomas feel free. I don't
think it adds much.

B - I believe that Jesus talked about love, not being a hypocrite and
seeing ourselves within each other. I believe Jesus talked about
faith...true strong faith that could allow you to do anything as long
as it did not harm another. I also believe that Jesus talked about
shedding the self to allow the Christos within to shine (hide it under
a bush oh no.....). I believe that he wanted to bring people back to
the old ways pre-Moses...the most ancient beliefs of the early Hebrews
before it got changed...as I believe that Christianity got changed and
wish it were more as it was at the beginning pre-Paul and the council
of NIcene and Constantine. He came to uphold those old laws. At the
earliest point of all book faiths their seems to be a mysticism phase
that was seemingly truer to spirit and God before those "swine got
hold of pearls" and damaged and disregarded and changed them all. To
me...this is Jesus....and he talked on heaven or one of the many
levels of heaven and that it lays symbolically within (our Christos
nature) and that there is no hell but our own fears that are a lie of
illusion. To me, everything else is politics..people wanting
power...and lies...this Christian is digging through all of that to
find that pure Christianity that Jesus spoke of.
again..my opinion...I don't speak for all.
B.

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by DKleinecke

Post by r***@yahoo.com
This is why Jesus talked more about hell than heaven....

Did he indeed?

Yes, He did.

Post by DKleinecke
Aside from the dubious hadith about Dives and Lazarus where does he
speak about either of them?

It is not 'hadith'. The word is 'midrash'. And you have no evidence
that it is only midrash, either.

Post by DKleinecke
Aside from mere references like th ones about drinking wine in
paradise.
We do not even know from the gospels that the living Jesus (before his
own death) believed in resurrection.

This is not only false, it is outrageous that you would even suggest
it. Of _course_ we know this from the Gospels. John 2:19-21 is only
one of the more obvious examples:

Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will
raise it up." The Jews then said, "It has taken forty-six years to
build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?" But he
spoke of the temple of his body. (Joh 2:19-21 RSVA)

Clearly "rasing up the temple of his body" refers to resurrection.

Post by DKleinecke
However we are reasonably sure that some of the Jews (those of them
called Pharisees as opposed to those called Sadducees) did believe in
resurrection. But this kind of resurrection was the resurrection on
Judgment Day.

And it is only _because_ of the Resurrection of Christ that we have
the Resurrection on Judgment Day. That is why He is called "first born
of all creation" (Col 1:15).

Post by DKleinecke
We must not confused the symbolic Christ of Revelation with the living
Jesus.

You are out of line calling this 'confusion'. Such a blatant attempt
to bias the reader into accepting your disastrous conclusion
uncritically will not work here. It is NOT 'confusion'. It is correct
to identify them.

Post by DKleinecke
There is no evidence that Jesus taught what Revelation says (in
fact, indications are that revelation was new to John).

Sure, there is evidence. We have the witness of the author of
Revelation himself. If you won't take his word for it, why should any
of us take _your_ word that they did not teach the same thing?

Post by DKleinecke
Jesus is reported as describing the final days in terms similar to
those in Revelation - but not identical. But Jesus' stops before the
story reaches Paradise.

True. But that is no grounds for supposing that the two descriptions
might differ.

Post by DKleinecke
What do people here think Jesus said about either of these subjects? I
mean the living Jesus and not Paul or any other follower and not the
Church.

You are biasing the evidence before anyone can answer you. It _is_
bias to exclude all these other sources of evidence, since we rely on
them all to _get_ the words of "the living Jesus".

Post by DKleinecke
If you want to quote the Gospel of Thomas feel free. I don't
think it adds much.

True. It does not. It is an obvious Gnostic forgery.

[r***@yahoo.com]

Post by DKleinecke

Post by r***@yahoo.com
This is why Jesus talked more about hell than heaven....

Did he indeed?
Aside from the dubious hadith about Dives and Lazarus where does he
speak about either of them? =A0Aside from mere references like th ones
about =A0drinking wine in paradise.
We do not even know from the gospels that the living Jesus (before his
own death) believed in resurrection. However we are reasonably sure
that some of the Jews (those of them called Pharisees as opposed to
those called Sadducees) did believe in resurrection. But this kind of
resurrection was the resurrection on Judgment Day.
We must not confused the symbolic Christ of Revelation with the living
Jesus. There is no evidence that Jesus taught what Revelation says (in
fact, indications are that revelation was new to John). Jesus is
reported as describing the final days in terms similar to those in
Revelation - but not identical. But Jesus' stops before the story
reaches Paradise.
What do people here think Jesus said about either of these subjects? I
mean the living Jesus and not Paul or any other follower and not the
Church. If you want to quote the Gospel of Thomas feel free. I don't
think it adds much.

Even a quick perusal of the gospels will show enough reference

Matthew 5:22
"But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of
hell."
Matthew 5:29
"It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your
whole body to be thrown into hell."
Matthew 5:30
"It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your
whole body to go into hell"
Matthew 10:28
"Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul.
Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in
hell"
Matthew 16:18
"I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail
against it."
Matthew 18:9
"And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It
is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and
be thrown into the fire of hell."
Matthew 23:15
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You
travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes
one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are."
Matthew 23:33
"You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?"
Matthew 25:41
"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are
cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels"
Matthew 25:46
"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to
eternal life"
Luke 12:5
"But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the
killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell
you, fear him."

there are of course, other references that don't directly say the word
hell...
Matthew 8:12
"But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the
darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
Matthew 13:41-42
"The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of
his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. They will
throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and
gnashing of teeth."
Matthew 13:49-50
"This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come
and separate the wicked from the righteous and throw them into the
fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."

And of course alluded to in parables such as the unmerciful
servant..."
Matthew 18:34-35
"In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured,
until he should pay back all he owed. This is how my heavenly Father
will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your
heart."
=2E..the parable of the wedding banquet...
Matthew 22:13
"Then the king told the attendants, 'Tie him hand and foot, and throw
him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and
gnashing of teeth"
=2E.. the parable of the talents...
Matthew 25:30
"throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there
will be weeping and gnashing of teeth"
=2E... the drunken servant....
Matthew 24:51
"He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites,
where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth"

And since the OP had to do with judgment and condemnation...
Matthew 5:22
"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be
subject to judgment."
Matthew 10:15
"I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah
on the day of judgment than for that town"
Matthew 11:22
"But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the
day of judgment than for you"
Matthew 12:36
"But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of
judgment for every careless word they have spoken"
John 3:18
"Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not
believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the
name of God's one and only Son"
John 5:22
"Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to
the Son"
John 5:24
"I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent
me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over
from death to life."
John 5:29
"those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done
evil will rise to be condemned."
John 5:30
"By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment
is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me"
John 9:39
"Jesus said, "For judgment I have come into this world, so that the
blind will see and those who see will become blind"
John 16:8
"When he comes, he will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin
and righteousness and judgment:"


is that enough?

[DKleinecke]

Post by r***@yahoo.com

Post by r***@yahoo.com
This is why Jesus talked more about hell than heaven....

is that enough?

You didn't do any research on Jesus' references to heaven so we still
have no evidence that Jesus talked more about hell than heaven.

The indirect "references" to hell are, of course, irrelevant. That
they refer to Hell is mere exegesis.

Let's be crude about this. In Strong's concordance there are 14 gospel
references to "hell" and over 150 references to "heaven". That sounds
like more talk about heaven than about hell.

Most of the material about both hell and heaven is not directly
descriptive of either (apart, of course, from Dives and Lazarus).
Mostly it describes actions that will send you to one or another.

Mark has one pericope (9.42-48) which involves hell (he calls it
GEENNA) and describes it (9.48) as "where the worm does not die and
the fire is not extinguished." Matthew (5.29-30 and 18.6-9) and Luke
(17.1-2) have copied this from Mark. Luke has removed all the
references to hell which he, one assumes, felt were not part of Jesus'
authentic message.

Luke (again apart from Dives and Lazarus) has two mentions of hell. In
10.15 it is mentioned, but nor described, in the ritual curse on
Capernaum. In 12.5 it seems to say that God has the power to throw one
there. Both of these last two are in Matthew (11.21 and 10.28) and are
therefore from Q.

Matthew, in whom one easily detects less of a spirit of loving
kindness, hell gets more play. In 5.22 GEENNA is described as being of
fire. 16.18 is a reference to the gates of hell and is part of the
blessing on Peter which is controversial for a number of reasons.
23.15 is part of the ritual curse on the Pharisees and refers to the
sons of hell - not hell itself. 23.33 is another part of the same
curse and is a reference to the judgment of hell.

Hence there are only two explicit descriptions of Hell in the gospels
- the story (which I insulted earlier - and I withdraw my insult)
about Dives and Lazarus and Mark 9.48. This is not very substantial.

I acknowledge that Matthew clearly intended some, or all, of his
references to "fire" to be read as hell. He was obviously an angry
man. But I am not going to try to calm him down here.

Mark 9.48 is obviously based on Isaiah 66.24 and we might therefore
read it as a quotation by Jesus from scripture rather than one of his
teachings.

[RP]

"A man sees what he wants to see and disreagrds the rest"
-Song lyric

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by DKleinecke

Post by r***@yahoo.com
This is why Jesus talked more about hell than heaven....

Did he indeed?

Yes, He did.
Even a quick perusal of the gospels will show enough reference

I think there's more about Love in the gospels:

a.. Matthew 3:17
And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am
well pleased."
Matthew 3:16-17 (in Context) Matthew 3 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Matthew 5:43
[ Love for Enemies ] "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor
and hate your enemy.'
Matthew 5:42-44 (in Context) Matthew 5 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Matthew 5:44
But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,
Matthew 5:43-45 (in Context) Matthew 5 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Matthew 5:46
If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the
tax collectors doing that?
Matthew 5:45-47 (in Context) Matthew 5 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Matthew 6:5
[ Prayer ] "And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love
to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by
men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full.
Matthew 6:4-6 (in Context) Matthew 6 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Matthew 6:24
"No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the
other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot
serve both God and Money.
Matthew 6:23-25 (in Context) Matthew 6 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Matthew 12:18
"Here is my servant whom I have chosen, the one I love, in whom I delight; I
will put my Spirit on him, and he will proclaim justice to the nations.
Matthew 12:17-19 (in Context) Matthew 12 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Matthew 17:5
While he was still speaking, a bright cloud enveloped them, and a voice from
the cloud said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.
Listen to him!"
Matthew 17:4-6 (in Context) Matthew 17 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Matthew 19:19
Jesus replied, " 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do
not give false testimony, honor your father and mother,' and 'love your
neighbor as yourself.' "
Matthew 19:18-20 (in Context) Matthew 19 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Matthew 22:37
Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all
your soul and with all your mind.'
Matthew 22:36-38 (in Context) Matthew 22 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Matthew 22:39
And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'
Matthew 22:38-40 (in Context) Matthew 22 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Matthew 23:6
they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the
synagogues;
Matthew 23:5-7 (in Context) Matthew 23 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Matthew 23:7
they love to be greeted in the marketplaces and to have men call them
'Rabbi.'
Matthew 23:6-8 (in Context) Matthew 23 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Matthew 24:12
Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold,
Matthew 24:11-13 (in Context) Matthew 24 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Mark 1:11
And a voice came from heaven: "You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am
well pleased."
Mark 1:10-12 (in Context) Mark 1 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Mark 9:7
Then a cloud appeared and enveloped them, and a voice came from the cloud:
"This is my Son, whom I love. Listen to him!"
Mark 9:6-8 (in Context) Mark 9 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Mark 12:30
Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with
all your mind and with all your strength.'
Mark 12:29-31 (in Context) Mark 12 (Whole Chapter)
a.. Mark 12:31
The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no
commandment greater than these."
Mark 12:30-32 (in Context) Mark 12 (Whole Chapter)

326.. Mark 12:33
To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all
your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than
all burnt offerings and sacrifices."
Mark 12:32-34 (in Context) Mark 12 (Whole Chapter)
327.. Luke 3:22
and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a
voice came from heaven: "You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well
pleased."
Luke 3:21-23 (in Context) Luke 3 (Whole Chapter)
328.. Luke 6:27
[ Love for Enemies ] "But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do
good to those who hate you,
Luke 6:26-28 (in Context) Luke 6 (Whole Chapter)
329.. Luke 6:32
"If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even
'sinners' love those who love them.
Luke 6:31-33 (in Context) Luke 6 (Whole Chapter)
330.. Luke 6:35
But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting
to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons
of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked.
Luke 6:34-36 (in Context) Luke 6 (Whole Chapter)
331.. Luke 7:42
Neither of them had the money to pay him back, so he canceled the debts of
both. Now which of them will love him more?"
Luke 7:41-43 (in Context) Luke 7 (Whole Chapter)
332.. Luke 10:27
He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all
your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind' ; and, 'Love
your neighbor as yourself.' "
Luke 10:26-28 (in Context) Luke 10 (Whole Chapter)
333.. Luke 11:42
"Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and
all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of
God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone.
Luke 11:41-43 (in Context) Luke 11 (Whole Chapter)
334.. Luke 11:43
"Woe to you Pharisees, because you love the most important seats in the
synagogues and greetings in the marketplaces.
Luke 11:42-44 (in Context) Luke 11 (Whole Chapter)
335.. Luke 16:13
"No servant can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love
the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You
cannot serve both God and Money."
Luke 16:12-14 (in Context) Luke 16 (Whole Chapter)
336.. Luke 20:13
"Then the owner of the vineyard said, 'What shall I do? I will send my
son, whom I love; perhaps they will respect him.'
Luke 20:12-14 (in Context) Luke 20 (Whole Chapter)
337.. Luke 20:46
"Beware of the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing
robes and love to be greeted in the marketplaces and have the most important
seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets.
Luke 20:45-47 (in Context) Luke 20 (Whole Chapter)
338.. John 5:42
but I know you. I know that you do not have the love of God in your
hearts.
John 5:41-43 (in Context) John 5 (Whole Chapter)
339.. John 8:42
[ The Children of the Devil ] Jesus said to them, "If God were your
Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not
come on my own; but he sent me.
John 8:41-43 (in Context) John 8 (Whole Chapter)
340.. John 11:3
So the sisters sent word to Jesus, "Lord, the one you love is sick."
John 11:2-4 (in Context) John 11 (Whole Chapter)
341.. John 13:1
[ Jesus Washes His Disciples' Feet ] It was just before the Passover
Feast. Jesus knew that the time had come for him to leave this world and go
to the Father. Having loved his own who were in the world, he now showed
them the full extent of his love.
John 13:1-3 (in Context) John 13 (Whole Chapter)
342.. John 13:34
"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you
must love one another.
John 13:33-35 (in Context) John 13 (Whole Chapter)
343.. John 13:35
By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one
another."
John 13:34-36 (in Context) John 13 (Whole Chapter)
344.. John 14:15
[ Jesus Promises the Holy Spirit ] "If you love me, you will obey what I
command.
John 14:14-16 (in Context) John 14 (Whole Chapter)
345.. John 14:21
Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who
loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself
to him."
John 14:20-22 (in Context) John 14 (Whole Chapter)
346.. John 14:23
Jesus replied, "If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father
will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.
John 14:22-24 (in Context) John 14 (Whole Chapter)
347.. John 14:24
He who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear
are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me.
John 14:23-25 (in Context) John 14 (Whole Chapter)
348.. John 14:31
but the world must learn that I love the Father and that I do exactly what
my Father has commanded me. "Come now; let us leave.
John 14:30-31 (in Context) John 14 (Whole Chapter)
349.. John 15:9
"As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love.
John 15:8-10 (in Context) John 15 (Whole Chapter)
350.. John 15:10
If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed
my Father's commands and remain in his love.
John 15:9-11 (in Context) John 15 (Whole Chapter)
a.. John 15:12
My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.
John 15:11-13 (in Context) John 15 (Whole Chapter)
a.. John 15:13
Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his
friends.
John 15:12-14 (in Context) John 15 (Whole Chapter)
a.. John 15:17
This is my command: Love each other.
John 15:16-18 (in Context) John 15 (Whole Chapter)
a.. John 15:19
If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do
not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why
the world hates you.
John 15:18-20 (in Context) John 15 (Whole Chapter)
a.. John 17:26
I have made you known to them, and will continue to make you known in order
that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in
them."
John 17:25-26 (in Context) John 17 (Whole Chapter)
a.. John 21:15
[ Jesus Reinstates Peter ] When they had finished eating, Jesus said to
Simon Peter, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?"
"Yes, Lord," he said, "you know that I love you." Jesus said, "Feed my
lambs."
John 21:14-16 (in Context) John 21 (Whole Chapter)
a.. John 21:16
Again Jesus said, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me?" He answered,
"Yes, Lord, you know that I love you." Jesus said, "Take care of my sheep."
John 21:15-17 (in Context) John 21 (Whole Chapter)
a.. John 21:17
The third time he said to him, "Simon son of John, do you love me?" Peter
was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said,
"Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you." Jesus said, "Feed my
sheep.
John 21:16-18 (in Context) John 21 (Whole Chapter)

[r***@yahoo.com]

this is fine, but frankly it's not a refutation of what i said at all.
my original statement was that Jesus spoke more about hell than
heaven, not that he spoke more about hell than any other subject.

certainly love is very important. But my intent was to say that we do
not understand the greatness of his love until we understand the depth
of our condition and the condemnation we are under.

We sinned. we are separated from God by virtue of this fact because
the wages of sin is death.
IF you understand that, then you understand how great his love is in
providing salvation from our condition.

believe me, i'm not knocking love, but neither am i removing sin,
condemnation or judgment simply because they are unpleasant to talk
about. i'm not apologizing for it either.
Jesus loves us and we know that because he paid the penalty for our
sins and offers salvation to all who would call on his name and
repent.
If we are under no condemnation and there is no salvation then saying
God loves us is a nice sentiment, but not much else.

[Matthew Johnson]

In article <uUAKj.3683$***@trnddc06>, DKleinecke says...

[snip]

Post by DKleinecke
You didn't do any research on Jesus' references to heaven so we still
have no evidence that Jesus talked more about hell than heaven.

Well, let's see if he comes back with any. He may have never intended to cover
that much detail in only one post.

Post by DKleinecke
The indirect "references" to hell are, of course, irrelevant.

Now why would they be 'irrelevant'? Just because they are indirect? I don't
think so!

Post by DKleinecke
That
they refer to Hell is mere exegesis.

There is nothing 'mere' about exegesis.

Post by DKleinecke
Let's be crude about this. In Strong's concordance there are 14 gospel
references to "hell" and over 150 references to "heaven". That sounds
like more talk about heaven than about hell.

But what about all the synonyms? Not counting those would be _too_ crude.

Post by DKleinecke
Most of the material about both hell and heaven is not directly
descriptive of either (apart, of course, from Dives and Lazarus).

'Dives' is not mentioned in the Gospel! There is a _reason_ he is left nameless!

Post by DKleinecke
Mostly it describes actions that will send you to one or another.

So _what_ if it is not 'descriptive'?

Post by DKleinecke
Mark has one pericope (9.42-48) which involves hell (he calls it
GEENNA) and describes it (9.48) as "where the worm does not die and
the fire is not extinguished." Matthew (5.29-30 and 18.6-9) and Luke
(17.1-2) have copied this from Mark. Luke has removed all the
references to hell which he, one assumes, felt were not part of Jesus'
authentic message.

No, one does _not_ assume this, not, at least, unless one is in the bad habit of
practicing eisegesis. Are you?


[snip]

Post by DKleinecke
Matthew, in whom one easily detects less of a spirit of loving
kindness,

This is not only eisegesis, but it is _clearly_ the kind of judging that is
forbidden by Mat 7:1.


[snip]

Post by DKleinecke
I acknowledge that Matthew clearly intended some, or all, of his
references to "fire" to be read as hell. He was obviously an angry
man.

This too, is the forbidden judging.

[snip]

[r***@yahoo.com]

Post by DKleinecke

Post by r***@yahoo.com

Post by r***@yahoo.com
This is why Jesus talked more about hell than heaven....

is that enough?

You didn't do any research on Jesus' references to heaven so we still
have no evidence that Jesus talked more about hell than heaven.

You know, I was aware of this when I sent the post, but you had said
in your post from Apr 2
"Aside from the dubious hadith about Dives and Lazarus where does he
speak about either of them? Aside from mere references like th[e]
ones about drinking wine in paradise."

Fair enough that I didn't mention all the references to heaven.
I in fact, had a slightly different aim to my post than proving my
statement, since the thread seems to be more about moving away from
judgment and condemnation in modern religion.
I was aiming to show that Jesus DID teach on judgment and hell.

Post by DKleinecke
The indirect "references" to hell are, of course, irrelevant. That
they refer to Hell is mere exegesis.
Let's be crude about this. In Strong's concordance there are 14 gospel
references to "hell" and over 150 references to "heaven". That sounds
like more talk about heaven than about hell.
Most of the material about both hell and heaven is not directly
descriptive of either (apart, of course, from Dives and Lazarus).
Mostly it describes actions that will send you to one or another.

True.
We do learn some things indirectly about both through those statements
though
I'm including a brief summary of the heaven references below.

Post by DKleinecke
Mark has one pericope (9.42-48) which involves hell (he calls it
GEENNA) and describes it (9.48) as "where the worm does not die and
the fire is not extinguished." Matthew (5.29-30 and 18.6-9) and Luke
(17.1-2) have copied this from Mark. Luke has removed all the
references to hell which he, one assumes, felt were not part of Jesus'
authentic message.

I'm interested to know how one might justify saying that the rather
obvious references are "mere exegesis" and therefore "irrelevant", yet
make assumptions about what Luke felt were authentic and why he left a
reference out.

I'll also disclose that I am simply reading the gospels for what they
say.
I'm not making assumptions about Q, Markan priority, what the "living
Jesus" vs. "what others may deem as later additions" are supposed to
say...
I'm just reading the gospels straight up.

Post by DKleinecke
Matthew, in whom one easily detects less of a spirit of loving
kindness, hell gets more play.
I acknowledge that Matthew clearly intended some, or all, of his
references to "fire" to be read as hell. He was obviously an angry
man.

Judgment and condemnation are part and parcel of the gospel message.
Neither Matthew, or Jesus, are to be considered "angry men" for
speaking of our condition. It's the only reason salvation makes sense.

As for the word heaven... [I'll restrict my exhaustive search to
Matthew] it IS used a lot more than hell, but it also has several
meanings that simply aren't applicable to the discussion:

heavens as in the sky:
Matthew 14:19, 24:29, 24:31, 25:31, 26:64
Swearing by heaven
Matthew 5:34, 23:22
adjectively- as in heavenly Father/Father in Heaven,
Matthew 5:16, 5:45, 5:48, 6:1, 6:9, 6:14, 6:26, 6:32, 7:11, 7:21,
10:32, 10:33, 11:25, 12:50, 15:13, 18:10, 18:14,
18:19, 18:35, 23:29
Idiomatic "Heaven and earth" statements
Matthew 5:18
"Until heaven and earth disappear"

The kingdom of heaven:
Matthew 3:2, 4:17, 5:3, 5:10, 5:19 [2], 5:20, 7:21, 8:11, 10:7, 11:11,
11:12, 13:11, 13:24, 13:31, 13:33, 13:44, 13:45, 13:47, 13:52, 16:19,
18:1, 18:3, 18:4, 18:23, 19:12, 19:14, 19:23, 20:1, 22:2, 23:12, 25:1


Others:
Matthew 3:16
"heaven was opened and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a
dove"
Matthew 3:17
"A voice from heaven said, This is my Son..."
Matthew 5:12
"Great is your reward in heaven..."
Matthew 6:10
"Your will be done on earth as it is in Heaven"
Matthew 6:20
"store up for yourselves treasures in heaven"
Matthew 16:1
"... to show them a sign from heaven..."
Matthew 16:19
"whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you
loose on earth will be loosed in heaven"
Matthew 18:18
"whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you
loose on earth will be loosed in heaven"
Matthew 19:21
"follow me and you will have treasures in heaven"
Matthew 21:25
"Johns baptism, was it from heaven?"
Matthew 21:26
"If we say 'from heaven'..."
Matthew 24:36
"Not even the angels in heaven"
Matthew 28:2
"The angel of the Lord came down from heaven"
Matthew 28:2
"all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me

Additional info from the other three gospels.
Most of the references find direct counterparts in Matthew.

Luke 15:7
"There will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents"
John 3:13
"No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven--
the Son of Man"

Indirect reference
John 14:2-3
"In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have
told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. And if I go and
prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me
that you also may be where I am"

So there is likewise in Jesus' statements, precious little description
about heaven. Certainly the word heaven is used more often, but many
of even the kingdom of heaven statements are applicable to the kingdom
here on earth, nothing about heaven. The only statement directly is
from John 14
What we actually learn about heaven:
God lives there
Jesus was from there - John 3:13
Gods will is done there - Matthew 6:10
There are angels there - Matthew 24:36
There is rejoicing over repentance - Luke 15:7
It is a place of reward - Matthew 5:12
There are places there for humans - John 14:2-3
Not everyone goes there - Kingdom of Heaven statements- Matt. 5:20,
7:21, 10:33

Jesus never actually describes heaven, but we learn that the Father,
Jesus, Angels and some humans live there.
Not everyone goes there, it is a place of reward and heaven rejoices
over repentance from sin.

Interestingly enough, even then in the teachings on heaven, we learn
that not everyone will be there. It demands repentance from sin. This
is an indirect statement and a confirmation of judgment and
condemnation.
We see Gods love in that heaven rejoices when there is repentance and
a person finds a place in heaven, but still we can't escape the fact
that judgment awaits those that do not repent.

As for the descriptions...
Hell is described directly in
Matthew 18:9 'the fire of hell'
Matthew 25:41 'the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels'
Matthew 13:41-42 'a fiery furnace where there will be weeping and
gnashing of teeth'

Heaven is described indirectly in
John 14:2-3 'in my fathers house there are many rooms'

[AJA]

I've been lightly following this thread. My question is, what in heaven's
name does the number of references in the Bible have to do with a person's
getting heaven or avoiding hell? Blessings,
Ann

[DKleinecke]

Post by r***@yahoo.com
I'm interested to know how one might justify saying that the rather
obvious references are "mere exegesis" and therefore "irrelevant", yet
make assumptions about what Luke felt were authentic and why he left a
reference out.

There is a difference in our methods. I have added my own exegesis
whenever I felt it was relevant - but I expect it be read as my own
personal exegesis and given no more authority than that. But I am not
required to accept any one else's exegesis except, of course, as their
own exegesis.

My viewpoint is essentially that of Calvin. No one (not even Calvin)
stands between me and God. I have gone further than Calvin though,
because we know more today than we did is his day. I do not let the
Bible stand between me and God either. I feel it is foolish to read
the gospels as though they were somehow "truth". They are human
documents.

The gospel writers have personalities. I will call them by the usual
names, all of which are quite uncertain. Mark is sort of the salt-of-
the-earth, a simple man telling a marvelous story in simple words
(recent scholarship has suggested that Mark was much less simple than
the picture he presents - but I am thinking of the impression he
makes). Matthew is a hell-and-brimstone preacher. Luke is a slightly
prissy intellectual (think C. S. Lewis). John has maybe a half-dozen
verses about the historical Jesus but mostly he is writing a
meditation about the Logos.

The lost document called Q is quite impersonal. If there is an author
with a personality behind it I cannot detect him/her. I imagine it to
be product of a community of believers and not of a single author.
Using the concept of Q there are four non-trivial sources of
information about Jesus and his teaching - Q, Mark, special Luke and
special Matthew. Q matters the most for teaching and Mark for Jesus'
biography. Special Luke adds some teaching that it would be hard to go
without - the Prodigal Son, the good Samaritan and more. Special
Matthew can be ignored as rather uninspired folklore.

It is almost true that neither Matthew nor Luke knew any more about
Jesus than what they read in either Q or Mark. But both of them had
access to other information that was probably oral. The oral tradition
that Matthew knew was almost pure folklore. Luke knew some folklore
and, I fear, created some more on his own initiative (his nativity
narrative) but he also knew some valuable teachings.

Q is hard to follow on the question of heaven and hell. It appears to
some sense deny the reality of both of them as places in the physical
sense and to relocate them in the human psyche. I think this matter -
the eschatology in Q deserves more study that I am aware of. Mark
appears to accept the standard Jewish concepts of his day. Luke would
prefer to avoid the question.

And Matthew, as I said, is an angry man, an old-fashioned hell and
brimstone preacher. IMHO we make a serious error if we read Jesus like
Matthew did.

God, of course, is Love.

All of the rest is commentary.

[B]

I've been lightly following this thread. =A0My question is, what in heaven=

's

name does the number of references in the Bible have to do with a person's=
getting heaven or avoiding hell? =A0Blessings,
Ann

B - as far as this Christian is concerned...not much. I believe we all
go to Heaven..some right away..some after a few detours where they
come back and repeat the last grade again :)
Avoiding hell? believe in good..believe in love and stop believing in
hell. Treat others as you would want them to treat you. That's about
it.

I.M.O
B.

[r***@yahoo.com]

I've been lightly following this thread. =A0My question is, what in heaven=

's

name does the number of references in the Bible have to do with a person's=
getting heaven or avoiding hell? =A0Blessings,
Ann

nothing ann.
But perhaps following the thread lightly, you've missed what is going
on...
There is a battle now [as there has been for some time] over the
acceptance of what the bible says.
Note what DKleinecke said above:
"it is foolish to read the gospels as though they were somehow
"truth". They are human documents"

There is an attempt to remove the concept of hell and judgment from
the bible all together because it is unpleasant.
Some in the church simply will not teach on it, considering it a
harmful concept. Perhaps they mean well, but in thier human wisdom,
they are destroying the essence of christianity.

I'm certain some people are going to be REALLY upset that I said that,
and they are going to assume that I'm saying the essence of
christianity is hell and judgment, which I'm not. The essence of
christianity is love and redemption.
But love and redemption only make sense in the context. Gods love is
great because of what he has done for us: he has saved us from our
sins and redeemed us from sin and death. remove sin, judgment and
hell, and what you essentially have left is nothing.

I'm not really trying to stress hell and judgment over love, but i'll
say it again; unless we understand our condition- that we are sinners
and are separated from God because of that sin, we cannot see the
greatness of his love and the salvation he offers.
strip that away and all God becomes is a benevolent grandpa that sort
of smiles on what we do.

[r***@yahoo.com]

Post by DKleinecke
My viewpoint is essentially that of Calvin. No one (not even Calvin)
stands between me and God. I have gone further than Calvin though,
because we know more today than we did is his day. I do not let the
Bible stand between me and God either. I feel it is foolish to read
the gospels as though they were somehow "truth". They are human
documents.

Anyone can reject what the gospels say as truth.
The references were included to show they actually existed biblically.
Whatever justifications for why they won't be accepted as truth are
personal.
But the references to heaven, hell, and judgment are there.

[AJA]

Post by r***@yahoo.com

I've been lightly following this thread. =A0My question is, what in
heaven 's
name does the number of references in the Bible have to do with a
person's=
getting heaven or avoiding hell? =A0Blessings,
Ann

nothing ann.
I'm not really trying to stress hell and judgment over love, but i'll
say it again; unless we understand our condition- that we are sinners
and are separated from God because of that sin, we cannot see the
greatness of his love and the salvation he offers.
strip that away and all God becomes is a benevolent grandpa that sort
of smiles on what we do.

Agreeing that we must understand our condition- there are hard admonitions
against sin in the Bible. Indeed, many.
Being Christian, of couse I accept that I am a sinner, every day, every
minute. But being a Christian I also know that by grace I am forgiven- sins
wiped out, clean gone and forgotten by my Lord, and that I am given the gift
of saving grace each time I truly and earnestly repent and try to follow
God's way. Each time I fail, and each time I'm forgiven again.
That's the part that often gets lost in conviction preaching. I've had to
go to Church men and women and pray Lord have mercy to get the 'feel' of
forgiveness. For this life long Christian it has been a long, rough journey
to knowledge and acceptance of God's forgiveness. I would never have
received this gift of blessed assurance through conviction preaching.
Conviction preaching and teaching, in my experience, can go really
overboard- overshadowing the Good News. More than likely it drives people
to the conclusion that all is hopeless, when in fact, the Good News is about
a 'common holiness'. Common, in the sense that forgivness is just a breath
of Yes, Lord, away.
I'd like to see long and intelligent posts here on forgiveness, on just how
it works through Christ crucified, how forgiveness can be understood and
acted upon.
My problem with this tread is that the _ numbers_ of references seem to have
been put forth as proof of something about conviction of sins, and/or love
of God.

Blessings,
Ann

[B]

Post by r***@yahoo.com
I'm not really trying to stress hell and judgment over love, but i'll
say it again; unless we understand our condition- that we are sinners
and are separated from God because of that sin, we cannot see the
greatness of his love and the salvation he offers.
strip that away and all God becomes is a benevolent grandpa that sort
of smiles on what we do.

B - God is all..God is within and surrounding us all...how can anyone
be separated from God except in their minds? To say that we are
separate from God states that God is limited. If we are away from
God..then where are we? if God is everywhere and created
everything...then how can one be away from God? I think we can believe
the lie of separation and the illusion of it..but I don't believe it
is truth.
The light of God is in all....our own egos and fears deny this because
we have overidentified with the creation and not the creator.
I.M.O
Bren

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by B

Post by r***@yahoo.com
I'm not really trying to stress hell and judgment over love, but
i'll say it again; unless we understand our condition- that we are
sinners and are separated from God because of that sin, we cannot
see the greatness of his love and the salvation he offers. strip
that away and all God becomes is a benevolent grandpa that sort of
smiles on what we do.

B - God is all..

Wrong, and even very wrong. This terribly wrong opinion of yours,
Bren, shows how very far you are from _all_ forms of Christianity.

Post by B
God is within and surrounding us all.

Ah, but this is very different. This part is true. What a pity then,
you always insist on using this truth as an excuse to believe such an
anti-truth!

Post by B
..how can anyone be separated from God except in their minds?

Why, by their sins, of course. Such as professing Pantheism.

Post by B
To say that we are separate from God states that God is limited.

No, it does not. Will you say that it 'limits' God to say that God
does not create a stone too heavy for him to move it? It is no more of
a limit to say that sin separates men from God.

Post by B
If we are away from God..then where are we?

'Away' and 'separate' are not the same.

Post by B
if God is everywhere and created everything...then how can one be
away from God?

Easily. By embracing Pantheism.

Post by B
I think we can believe the lie of separation and the illusion of
it..but I don't believe it is truth.
The light of God is in all....

If "the light of God is in all", then why are you still in such
darkness?

Post by B
our own egos and fears deny this because we have overidentified with
the creation and not the creator.

Since you confuse the created, namely, yourself and what is within
yourself, with God, the uncreated. it is you who are still
"overidentifying with creation".

Every Pantheist is "overidentifying with creation".

[Eric Bohn]

On Mar 30, 10:35=A0pm, AJA <***@optonline.net> wrote:
<snip>

Helfire and damnation, while one is able to quote chapter and verse about =

such, is not

the Gospel good news.

Well hellfire and damnation are part of the Gospel message, so they're
good news for somebody. Perspective. Earthworms make bad soil
suitable for good seed.

[A Brown]

Post by AJA

Helfire and damnation, while one is able to quote chapter and verse about
=

such, is not

the Gospel good news.

Well hellfire and damnation are part of the Gospel message, so they're
good news for somebody.

Haven't we been thru this before?

The Gospel's mention more about love....than hellfire and damnation...

[Eric Bohn]

On May 1, 10:44=A0pm, A Brown <***@rob*nospam*p.com> wrote:
<snip>

Post by A Brown
The Gospel's mention more about love....than hellfire and damnation...

To a Christian there is no distinction, Hell is part of God's plan of
love for mankind -- God created Hell as a necessary barrier between
good and evil.

[B]

Post by Eric Bohn
<snip>

Post by A Brown
The Gospel's mention more about love....than hellfire and damnation...

To a Christian there is no distinction, Hell is part of God's plan of
love for mankind -- God created Hell as a necessary barrier between
good and evil.

B - perhaps to you as a Christian..but please don't speak for all of
us Eric. I don't believe that God created Hell at all....but that we
created it because we believe in it and thereby manifest it. Evil is
simply a belief that we have bought into ..as far as this Christian is
concerned. Yes people do ..do evil....but it stems..I would
opine...from fear and a belief that we are not united as ONE. The
first sin was a belief that God is separate from us and that each of
us is a totally different entity..and not one in God thereby setting
up mistrust..overidentification with difference, competition etc. So I
say that that is my opinion as yours is yours.

Blessings
Bren