Meet Jeff Barth — He May Have Just Made the ‘Greatest Political Ad Ever’

User Profile: Jim

Member Since: March 24, 2011

CommentsDisplaying Jim's 10 most recent comments.

  • Kmichaels: Again, I was not trying to play semantic games. Perhaps I was unclear in my thoughts. Of course, no English words appeared in the original manuscripts. My point was that “grave” and “Gahenna” are the appropriate translations. I believe that, if the word “Gehenna” was used when Jesus spoke of “hell”, we would more clearly understand the figurative nature of His discourses!

  • To: Trolltrainer and Kmichaels: Ok. I think we are closer to agreement than I realized. I agree that people will be given the opportunity to understand and aceept the gift of Christ after their lives are complete on earth. I differ only in my belief that unltimately “every knee shall bow and tongue confess that Christ is Lord”. I believe that the grace of God is irresistible when it is clearly presented. Ultimately, “all things will be reconcilied” to Jesus. My best to you both and my compliments on your scriptural insights. I don’t know much of LDS beliefs, but I do believe you are not a cult!

  • Kmichaels: Let’s be precise, “grave” and “Gehenna” are often mentioned in the Bible. They have been translated to “hell”. When Jesus referred to the misery of Gehenna it would be like me referring to the misery of East Cleveland. Both very real places that most would not want to live in!

  • kmichaels: It is not sematics that I am using. It is logic. The bottom line is that the great majority of humankind has never heard the Gospel, so they could not possibly have rejected it. Additionally, you and Trolltrainer are aguing that those who hear the message and choose to reject it are overcoming God’s will that all be saved. I suggest that you all read a book entitled “Hope Beyond Heel” by Gerard Beauchemin. It is a well-reasoned, scripturally loaded look at hell. If you read it, you will realize that there are scores of scriptures supporting salvation for all. There are clearly scriptures in support of the concept of eternal damnation. Assuming that the translation is correct, the question becomes, which scriptures do you take literally and which do you apply a figurative meaning to?

  • Gonzo: That is a silly statement. Jesus told only a few people. In the meantime, people were continuing to die by the thousands each day without having heard the message. So you are fine with them being abused for eternity for not accepting a message they never heard? Wrestle with this issue before you self-righteously assure yourself that you were clever enough to make the right decision.

  • The oldest lie was “you could be like God”. There is no mention of hell or any concept relating to eternal punishment in the entire Old Testament. I remember being very confused after I became a Christian and read the Old Testament and found no mention of hell in all 37 books. Why didn’t God tell Adam, Noah, Moses or any Patriarch about such a significant place????

  • Actually, “hell” is never mentioned in the Bible. Jesus referred to Gehenna (a real, vile place outside of Jerusalem) only on 5 occassions. Hell is never mentioned in the Old Testament. The doctrine of eeternal punishment was not officially endorsed by the church until around AD 500 under the influence of Augustin, a great thinker who unfortunately did not speak Greek.

  • If God does not save everyone, then either He CAN‘T or He WON’T. If He can’t (i.e., man‘s descision to reject Jesus overpowers God’s desire to save all), than He is NOT OMNIPOTENT. If He won’t (i.e., Calvanist teaching on predestination), than He is no more loving than the gods of Greece and Rome. Jesus came to seek and save those which are lost….That includes everyone. I know that Jesus will be successful in His mission.

  • We all tend to interpret scriptures in a manner to conform to our beliefs. The scriptures are full of statements affirming that all will be saved. Think about this statement: If God does not save everyone, then either He can‘t or He won’t. If he can‘t then He is not omnipotent and if He won’t, then the monster label seems appropriate.