Can you imagine this

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
my goodness you need to lighten up, perhaps when you are in your throne of self righteousness you may condescend to look upon me as i burn eternally in agony for having been born imperfect and thus prone to aberration, sweet dreams of torturing the wicked!

Lighten up? It is a testament to your gross misunderstanding of scripture and the dire warnings offered by Christ that you have the gall to ask me to "lighten up" when discussing the eternal damnation of lost souls. No, I will not lighten up; I will pray for you.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no i am not avoiding, i did not realise what you were asking, a translation of 2000 should certainly be more accurate than one given in the 1600s, that is of course if the translation is accurate.

Okay, then we agree. Case closed.

By this I will not say that a 2000 translation is the best there ever will be. The future will, with more knowledge, produce a better still translation.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
[b]the intended meaning or your exegesis, yip, fess up a clear case of imposing your agenda on scripture.

No, the intended meaning of the word is clear by its usage; the word itself, kolasis. That word doesn't mean "to cut off." You are the one imposing your agenda on scripture. I'm trying to save it from your willful acts of linguistic ...[text shortened]... those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name."”[/b]

while i thankyou for your concern, there is not question in my mind that the verse does not refer in any sense to torment, to state that it does is to impose ones exegesis on scripture, the fact of the matter is that the wages for sin is not eternal punishment but simply death,

(Romans 6:23) . . .For the wages sin pays is death, but the gift God gives is everlasting life by Christ Jesus our Lord.

here again the balance of the verse is preserved, for the antithesis of life is not eternal punishment, but death

Again the idea of destruction rather than torment is evident from other scriptures, notably

(2 Thessalonians 1:9) These very ones will undergo the judicial punishment of everlasting destruction from before the Lord and from the glory of his strength. . . (new world translation)

"These will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction" (NRSV)

added to this is the fact that in the Hebrew portion of scripture ( i know you dont really like to venture there for there is not a jot to support trinitarian and other platonic concepts) the punishment was never torture, but simply death, or cutting off.

(Genesis 9:11) . . .Yes, I do establish my covenant with you: No more will all flesh be cut off by waters of a deluge, and no more will there occur a deluge to bring the earth to ruin.”

(Exodus 12:19) . . .because anyone tasting what is leavened, whether he is an alien resident or a native of the land, that soul must be cut off from the assembly of Israel.

(Psalm 37:9) . . .For evildoers themselves will be cut off, But those hoping in Jehovah are the ones that will possess the earth.

(Psalm 37:22) . . .For those being blessed by him will themselves possess the earth, But those upon whom evil is called by him will be cut off.

thus it is perfectly clear why a bible translator would want to preserve the balance of the verse, given that there has no hint of torment and in reflection of the mode of punishment in the past and the scriptural record which has been preserved, life and the antithesis of life , which is death, not punishment.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
Okay, then we agree. Case closed.

By this I will not say that a 2000 translation is the best there ever will be. The future will, with more knowledge, produce a better still translation.

get a New World Translation of the Holy scriptures in Swedish, it shall be like honey to your lips 🙂 (they are freely distributed to those who shall read them)

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Lighten up? It is a testament to your gross misunderstanding of scripture and the dire warnings offered by Christ that you have the gall to ask me to "lighten up" when discussing the eternal damnation of lost souls. No, I will not lighten up; I will pray for you.

i see it is your concern for me, ok, i know you guys take this commission to save lost souls like me seriously, i did not mean to diminish your responsibility, but i somehow always feel touched when someone says that they shall pray for me, it shows real genuine concern, thanks Epi , it is a credit to your sincerity and perhaps indicative of my well, not lack of sincerity, but horsing around 🙂

The real problem with Matthew 25:43 is that it's an interpolation, and it should be obvious because of the way it runs in complete contradiction with the context it was sloppily pasted into, probably by some Greek convert to Christianity while he was making a copy of Matthew.

Think about it! After a very long story in which Jesus tried so hard to explain how much he empathizes with human suffering, so much so that he says we ought to think of even the "least" as if s/he were him...how does he turn right around and, all in the same breath say, "Oh, but one day I'm going to be the direct cause of the worst suffering ever"?

No, sorry, but the original teachings of Jesus tell us about a God who would never hurt anyone, not for a second, much less forever.

I've actually written an entire book on this topic--Hell? No! Why You Can Be Certain There's No Such Place As Hell, (for anyone interested, you can get a free ecopy of Did Jesus Believe in Hell?, one of the most compelling chapters of my book at www.thereisnohell.com), but if I may, let me share one of the many points I make in it to explain why.

If one is willing to look, there's substantial evidence contained in the gospels to show that Jesus opposed the idea of Hell. For example, in Luke 9:51-56, is a story about his great disappointment with his disciples when they actually suggested imploring God to rain FIRE on a village just because they had rejected him. His response: "You don't know what spirit is inspiring this kind of talk!" Presumably, it was NOT the Holy Spirit. He went on, trying to explain how he had come to save, heal and relieve suffering, not be the CAUSE of it.

So it only stands to reason that this same Jesus, who was appalled at the very idea of burning a few people, for a few horrific minutes until they were dead, could never, ever burn BILLIONS of people for an ETERNITY!

True, there are a few statements that made their way into the copies of copies of copies of the gospel texts which place “Hell” on Jesus’ lips, but these adulterations came along many decades after his death, most likely due to the Church filling up with Greeks who imported their belief in Hades with them when they converted.

Bear in mind that the historical Protestant doctrine of the inspiration of the Scriptures applies only to the original autographs, not the copies. But sadly, the interpolations that made their way into those copies have provided a convenient excuse for a lot of people to get around following Jesus’ real message.

Originally posted by RickLannoye
The real problem with Matthew 25:43 is that it's an interpolation, and it should be obvious because of the way it runs in complete contradiction with the context it was sloppily pasted into, probably by some Greek convert to Christianity while he was making a copy of Matthew.

Think about it! After a very long story in which Jesus tried so hard to expl ...[text shortened]... a convenient excuse for a lot of people to get around following Jesus’ real message.

its beautiful! 🙂

Originally posted by RickLannoye
The real problem with Matthew 25:43 is that it's an interpolation, and it should be obvious because of the way it runs in complete contradiction with the context it was sloppily pasted into, probably by some Greek convert to Christianity while he was making a copy of Matthew.

Think about it! After a very long story in which Jesus tried so hard to expl a convenient excuse for a lot of people to get around following Jesus’ real message.

His response: "You don't know what spirit is inspiring this kind of talk!" Presumably, it was NOT the Holy Spirit. He went on, trying to explain how he had come to save, heal and relieve suffering, not be the CAUSE of it.

That was not Jesus' purpose for his earthly ministry, to bring down judgment on humanity. Indeed, He told Nicodemus, "God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world" (John 3:17). But, even though it wasn't Christ's purpose while on earth to call down judgment on people, Peter says in Acts 10:42, "[Jesus] commanded us... to testify that it is He who was ordained by God to be Judge of the living and the dead."

Jesus said, "When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory... he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left... 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 25:31-33, 41).

It is clear then, that Christ's earthly ministry is an invitation to the Kingdom, but His second coming is to be a time of Judgment.

True, there are a few statements that made their way into the copies of copies of copies of the gospel texts which place “Hell” on Jesus’ lips, but these adulterations came along many decades after his death, most likely due to the Church filling up with Greeks who imported their belief in Hades with them when they converted.

Give me a break. The New Testament is the most reliably preserved document in the historical record. It is precisely because there are so many copies that the originals can be accurately transcribed, not the other way around as you suggest.

Furthermore, if these "adulterations" came along, as you say, merely "decades" after Christ's death, undoubtedly those who heard Him teach firsthand would have still been around to refute them and set the record straight. There's no historical record of any kind of contemporaneous public refutation of the Apostles' testimony.

But sadly, the interpolations that made their way into those copies have provided a convenient excuse for a lot of people to get around following Jesus’ real message.

Your claim that certain "interpolations" made their way into the copies is extraordinarily weak. That said, even if it were true, how does Christ's teachings about hell excuse anyone from following His "real message"? As Christians we still believe the Gospel and spread the Gospel far and wide, while following the commands of Christ in our daily lives. How do Christ's teachings involving eternal torment help anyone "get around" following Jesus?