So we get to spend eternity with the same bodies we have here on Earth? I assume they stop deteriorating, 'cause after 100 years or so the human body gets to be in a pretty miserable condition. Spending eternity getting older and frailer would be a hell in itself.
No, our bodies must stay in whatever state they were last in on Earth. Therefore, the only answer is today, to accept Jesus and kill myself, that way I’ll get to spend eternity with a 45 year old body instead of however old it would be when I die naturally. I wish you would have told me this before - I would have killed myself while still a teenager, before I developed this annoying bunion on my right foot. Darn you.
1Pet1:20-21(Amplified) states, “First you must understand this, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of any personal or private or special interpretation. For no prophecy ever originated because some man willed it - it never came by human impulse - but as men spoke from God who were borne along by the Holy Spirit”. Peter further warned about misinterpretation later in chapter 3, “there are some things in those (epistles of Paul) that are difficult to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist and misconstrue to their own utter destruction, just as they distort and misinterpret the rest of the Scriptures” (2Pet3:16)
Contrary to your post, we are not to interpret the Bible however we wish. Doing so is dangerous and destructive, as can even be verified from previous posts on this very thread. Just a few posts ago, one individual postulated that although he’s now an atheist, at one time he did accept Christ as His savior - therefore according to his original denomination he is still saved (the once saved\always saved doctrine). Since the Bible doesn’t actually teach that doctrine, you can see how such false interpretations can be extremely destructive to those who might rely on them. Ultimately, the correct interpretation of the scriptures can only be obtained by studying all the scriptures and then seeking the mind of the Holy Spirit - He’s the One Who inspired and authored them.
You are misinformed about the Biblical view of the afterlife. 1Cor15:50 (Amplified)states, "flesh and blood cannot inherit or share in the Kingdom of God; nor does the perishable - that which is decaying - inherit or share in the immortal ". Paul goes on to state, "We shall not all fall asleep (in death) but we shall all be transformed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the sound of the last trumpet call. For a trumpet will sound, and the dead in Christ will be raised imperishable - free and immune from decay…(1Cor15:52) Of course Paul was speaking about believers not the unsaved. The unsaved are ressurected later at the Great White Throne judgement (Rev20:11-13) and then destroyed (body and soul) in the Lake of fire (Rev20:14-15). These scriptures indicate that no fleshly bodies, either saved or unsaved, will continue into eternity. Believers receive a new immortal body while unbeliever’s bodies are destroyed forever.
Jesus indicates that our new heavenly bodies will be sexless (Luke20:34–36). But as an avowed atheist, this is immaterial for you since all you will ever experience is the old decaying, fleshly one you have now. When you die, you’ll be taken to where the rich man is now waiting for his own judgement, and you’ll both be thrown (along with all the appendages) into the lake of fire where you will cease to exist. Kind of a sad end since eternal life is readily available for “whosover wills”.
So what are you trying to say there? Maybe your predestined by God not to believe in Him to help others reafirm thier faith. it doesn’t say God knows from birth if you’re going to Hell. Which is what the question in the OP was about.
Do any Christian groups ever bother to study the bible in the languages it was written in? As it wasn’t written in English, or even all in Latin. And if not, aren’t all of these arguments somewhat suspect as quoting scripture as absolute fact in a language it wasn’t written in seems strange to me.
I’ve met more than a few Christians that believe that anyone that isn’t from their sect is damned. I don’t understand it. What makes them so sure that they are worshipping God right? And why do they assume that God actually cares about how you pray or whether it’s on Saturday or Sunday?
I also have been told that no one that isn’t a Christian could lead a morally upright life, as they can not tell the deference between right and wrong. That makes no sense to me, but most people that say things like that have no real justification anyway.
The whole world was doomed because one guy ate a piece of fruit? If this is a loving God, I’d hate to see a mean one.
Well, that was mighty nice of Him–after a lag of 4,000 years! Why didn’t he send Jesus the next week? What about all the people who died in the interim?
No, it’s worse–it’s the actions of a taunting, game-playing, murdering God–waiting for 4,000 years, then sending a “savior” (to a single tribe of people in an empire spanning only a small part of the earth) who will allow us to be forgiven for something we didn’t do–provided that we somehow recognize that he’s our savior, even though myriad individuals in other times and places have made exactly the same claim, backed by exactly the same evidence. And I’m supposed to worship a God who would do this?
No, just stating the facts. Anyway, I’m in good company: Jesus spoke more about hell than He did about heaven. Think about it: for a person to even begin looking for a way out, he must first be made aware that he’s sailing on the Titanic.
Stating the facts does not make one immune to being threatening. I would imagine, given the noble goals behind Christianity, that attempts to convert would be more of the carrot than of the stick.
Oh, and your analogy is flawed; it should be “he must first be made aware that he’s sinking”. Sailing on the Titanic, I would think, was quite fun.
All those who believed that God would do as He promised and would indeed send a future Saviour were justified by their faith. “Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness” (Gen15:6). Adam’s sin was a failure to believe what God said ie “for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” The antidote God has provided for everyone is to simply believe and trust what He says. The Old Testament saints looked forward to Christ’s sacrifice by faith and we look back to it by faith. It’s the same justifying faith and the same Christ whom we believe in. See also Heb10:38, “The just shall live by faith” and Heb11:6, “Without faith it is impossible to please God”
I’ve been mostly with you up till this- that statement is in no way true. His references to the Kingdom of God, the Kingdom of Heaven, Eternal Life & the
Rewards of the Afterlife/Resurrection far surpass His references to Hades, Gehenna, the Outer Darkness, the Wailing & Gnashing of Teeth & the Penalties of the Afterlife/Resurrection.
He did speak more about “Hell” than anyone else in the Bible- that is true.
I’m sure it was, that’s why they were too preoccupied to listen to the warnings, but when the ship actually started sinking it was too late. I’m sure many of them responded to the warnings as you just did: “we’re having a lot of fun here, and you’re spoiling it all with these threatening messages”. But the responsibility of those who recognize danger is to give a clear warning, how people respond to that warning is their own responsibility.
The prevailing view is… there is no prevailing view. Full-free-willers would say that you’re probably presently lost if you don’t repent. Eternal Security-ists would say that either you were never truly saved or that, if you were saved, God is just letting you drift till He pulls you back in.
So can you use it to reassure concerned C’tians? Probably not because even Eternal Security-ists could say you never were truly saved.
I’m afraid your analogy fails again; the Captain, in fact, heeded early warnings from another ship, whilst later warnings were sent to the wrong place and did not get to the Captain and bridge crew, let alone the passengers. The last warning - upon sighting of the iceberg - also led to a response on the part of the ship’s crew, though it was futile, and again was not sent to the passengers. If anything, your analogy suggests that any warnings are futile and that even taking reasonable action will doom you to failure.
That you are so sure that passengers continued their partying whilst sending away harried messengers also brings into question how certain you can be of other things; I suggest you research your analogies in future.
What about all the people living between the time of Adam and the time of Christ who weren’t Jews, and therefore had no means of knowing this particular revelation, and couldn’t possibly have believed or disbelieved in it since they had no way of knowing about it?
Oh, I don’t mean to question your beliefs - being an atheist I think you’re wrong, of course, but I have no illusions of persuading you otherwise - just correcting you on your inaccurate analogy. I believe my point on converting though threats stands, though.
