Originally posted by lemon limehe did exactly the same thing in another thread when I tried to engage him, his incompetence led to his making silly assertions of not providing evidence when it was his inability to understand the evidence that was the issue. It seems like a kind of modus operandi for him and makes for a very tedious discussion.
Check it out, he's doing exactly what I said he does. And now he wants to keep me dancing to see how many pages he can get added to [b]his thread. LOL[/b]
6 edits
-Removed-He was talking about now seeing obscurely, without full comprehension but eventually knowing God as he himself is known by God. (v.12)
For now we see in a mirror obscurely, but at that time face to face; now I know in part, but at that time I will fully know even as also I was fully known. (v.12)
The context includes the function of prophets -
For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is complete comes, that which is in part will be rendered useless. (v.9)
Concerning those whose names are not recorded in the book of life in Rev. 20:15, whom God says will be cast into the lake of fire - which you in vain seek to blame me, for believing the plain word of God -
I'll give you this and only this. Paul also says " Love ... believes all things, hopes all things ..." (v.7)
If you want to hope all things and hope God will save the eternally lost somehow, I don't object to that hope.
I already attempted to take a Universalist intepretation and my conscience would not let me do it, because it involves too much twisting of the Bible.
But if anyone wants to hope that on the scroll with seven seals on the umpteenth thousanth page - somehow God has a plan to rescue the eternally lost, go ahead and hope "all things".
-Removed-Define religionists. Is that someone who believes the words of the Holy Bible ?
Is that someone who sees in a Bible passage something different from your opinion? Is that a "religionist" ?
You see "And if anyone was not found written in the book of life, he was [NOT] cast into the lake of fire." (Rev. 20:15)
But someone else reads "And if anyone was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire." that makes that reader a "religionist" ?
6 edits
-Removed-If you're not going to read to the bottom of my reply, you might as well not read it divegeester.
Do you believe that there is an actual beast with seven heads and ten horns?
Of course not. Don't be silly.
The revelation was made known to John by signs (1:1)
Do you believe there is an actual woman who is a whore in Babylon?
This too is symbolic.
Do you believe there are actual trumpets in heaven?
Maybe. I don't insist there could not be.
Are you gradually working your way up to a lake of fire?
Though I have admitted the symbolism of these matters there still is a reality conveyed BY the symbols. And if the "lake of fire" is a sign it is a sign of something dreadful beyond all things to us.
I already indicated that the physics, geography, and science of eternal punishment or eternal fire I cannot claim with confidence to explain.
"Eternal punishment" is not a sign Matthew 25:46. And "eternal punishment" (25:46) is the "eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (25:41) .
It is hard to miss the point. And I do not think that God will rebuke me at the judgment seat of Christ for teaching that "eternal punishment" and "eternal fire" are warned against in the Bible.
The core of your debate is largly to insist that you are morally a better person for not believing that "eternal punishment" cannot be "eternal fire". The seething contempt you display for those who disagree is based on your judging others as far inferior in morality to yourself and even for their misrepresenting God.
This issue is not who has the better morality. The issue is how we should understand the revelation of the Bible.
Do you believe there was an actual chariot that took Elijah away?
Yes.
But if not and some angel or something appeared to take him away it makes no difference. He was raptured. He was taken away alive and physically.
I spend more time musing on what God has done in His salvation that men may be saved from that "eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matt. 25:41) .
If you argue that "eternal punishment" (Matt. 25:46) is so symbolic as to not be eternal then you should argue that "eternal life" (v.46) is correspondingly so symbolic that it is not eternal.
Do you think there is an actual bunch of keys to God's kingdom
Not as physical keys. This line of questioning is not doing much for your point. I am told that -
"And the devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimestone, where also the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever." (Rev. 20:10)
If you argue that it is SO symbolic as to not be a punishment "forever and ever" than there is no reason to not argue correspondingly that for Christ to "reign forever and ever" (Rev. 11:15) is also not literally true.
Do you think the there are actually 4 men on horses?
No.
But you think there is a real lake of real fire and real brimstone...?
Probably or something worse.
Now the New Jerusalem is also a sign of the mingling of God and man as one. The Bride and the Wife of the Lamb is symbolic of a large group of people conformed to the image of the Son of God.
The New Jerusalem symbolized as a mountain of gold on one hand and a temple or house is a sign of the organic mingling of God and man. And in that state as I said before, I expect there will no longer be any distance in our opinion and God's opinion.
Now I perhaps you're not reading my writing anymore at this point because of tiredness. If so please do not pout about things not explained or left out or overlooked.