Something that had me stumped.

[Lupac]

Hi, I was reading an exchange between a agnostic/leaning universalist and a evangelical-person. The agnostic guy said he didn't believe in hell, because some of his family had already died, being non-christians, and he didn't want to believe in a God would put them in hell forever. The evangelical quotes the scripture (Can't remember what book.), where Jesus says that unless someone forsakes his mother and father, that he's not worthy to follow him. How would you respond to something like this?

[Akira329]

Hey Lupac,
I believe the scripture being quoted is this:
Mat 10:37  He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

My question would be "What does this scripture have to do with some place that doesn't exist?"

Antaiwan

[Lupac]

Well, they were saying not worthy of Jesus = Hell. ...It was stupid

[Akira329]

What are you exactly stumped by??

1Ti 1:15 Faithful is the saying, and worthy of all welcome, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, foremost of whom am I."
1Ti 1:16 But therefore was I shown mercy, that in me, the foremost, Jesus Christ should be displaying all His patience, for a pattern of those who are about to be believing on Him for life eonian."

Rev 3:4  Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy.
Rev 3:5  He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

They will be worthy!

Antaiwan

[Lupac]

Um, it didn't really have me stumped. I just didn't think it through.

[Kat]

Hi Lupac,

The thing is you can not understand what a preacher implies about a certain Scripture because they do their own interpetation of the Scriptures.  The only way to learn the truth is to let the Scriptures interpet themself.  All Scriptures verify each other, none contradict.  Here is an email that Ray speaks to this point.

http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php?topic=3703.0 -----------------------

If you don't understand the mind of a Christian you will never understand why people like me do not usually debate them.  Let's say that they bring up a point (about anything) and you have Scripture that speaks directly to this point. Can you quote that Scripture to a Christian to make your point? NO, no you can't. Why is that? Because the second you quote it (according to them) you TOOK IT OUT OF CONTEXT. And to them, no Scripture is true "out of context."  "God is love" (I John 4:08), but ONLY IN THE CONTEXT OF I John 4:08. You cannot just quote a Scripture and believe that it is a statement of fact or statement of eternal truth. They won't hear of it.  But don't they quote Scripture to support their views. Yes, of course they do, but they use them IN CONTEXT.  Who determines whether their use is in context and your use is not in context?  Why THEY DO, of course, and that is because they understand hermeneutics and you don't. See the difference?  I don't either, but that's just the way it is. If you can corner a snake in a briar patch, then you can debate a Christian with the Scriptures.

God be with you,
Ray

[Lupac]

Okay, since this is my topic, I have another question.

It's about sulfur (brimstone). Ray says in LoF VI, that sulfur is:

SOME PROPERTIES OF SULFUR

SULFUR: "It is often called brimstone (burning stone) and ignited sulfur is mentioned in the earlier records of many countries as having been used for religious ceremonies, for PURIFYING (fumigating) buildings and for bleaching cloth" (Encyclopedia Britannica, page 536d). Gee, I wonder if spiritual brimstone might be used to PURIFY and fumigate people and bleach their darkened hearts to a bright white? Under the caption: "Methods of Production—Ancient producers described their method of obtaining sulfur from its ore as PURIFICATION BY FIRE" (Page 537a). (All caps emphasis is mine). "Purification by fire." That sounds very Biblical. Does God "purify" good and wonderful things by "fire?" Yes, He does: The WORDS of the Lord are pure words: as silver [silver? Isn't the silver qualities of our character also tried in 'fire,' I Cor. 3:12-13?] tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times" (Psalm 12:6). Now we all know that the very "words" of God are not burned in a literal fire. But "AS" silver is tried in literal fire, so SPIRITUALLY God's words are tried in spiritual fire.

But surely, according to what we have been told by doomsday prophets of eternal hell, sulfur must cause great torturing pain when brought into contact with human skin, and wouldn't the smell alone be enough to suffocate all in its presence? Continuing: "Physical Properties—Sulfur is TASTELESS and ODORLESS. IT HAS NO ACTION ON THE SKIN" (Page 537d)!

So maybe it's just the heat that is intensified by the use of sulfur, and that is its purpose in the lake of fire—to increase the intensity of the fire's heat to cause more insane pain? Continuing: "Physical Properties—Sulfur is A POOR CONDUCTOR OF BOTH HEAT and electricity..." (Page 538a)! Imagine that—a POOR CONDUCTOR OF HEAT! Theoretically, if God were to put enough brimstone into the lake of fire it would protect those in the fire like an asbestos suit! Is anyone beginning to see the sheer folly in the church's teaching that the lake of fire and brimstone are literal? I sure hope so.

NO, brimstone is not the demon of hell fire that it has been portrayed. Sulfur rather has hundreds and hundreds of beneficial uses (my Twentieth Century Dictionary says, 'innumerable uses') not the least of which are purification and medicines. But wait, there's more. Why do we find sulfur in the lake of fire? If it serves no detrimental purpose, is it possible that it serves a beneficial purpose? I think that we can all agree that the Bible uses the word "fire" in a figurative way on many occasions. I am certain that none would consider the following verses as using fire in a literal way:

Anyway, if that's true, then why have I heard of "sulfur fires" which form a "lava-like pool". Like here:

http://www.wood.army.mil/ENGRMAG/PDFs%20for%20Jul-Sept%2003/Ohara.pdf

(Note: I not trying to discredit Ray, nor the Bible. I'm just wondering because some people have told me that the brimstone in the LoF is to make the fire "hotter". They also said that burning sulfur makes a toxic fume to... make the LoF more horrible? IDK.)

Here's a picture I found on wikipedia that, I assume, is sulfur crystals burning.



What is this? I don't quite understand what sulfur is, or what exactly Revelation is referring too. Can anyone help? Thank you.

[mharrell08]

Okay, since this is my topic, I have another question.

It's about sulfur (brimstone). Ray says in LoF VI, that sulfur is:

SOME PROPERTIES OF SULFUR

SULFUR: "It is often called brimstone (burning stone) and ignited sulfur is mentioned in the earlier records of many countries as having been used for religious ceremonies, for PURIFYING (fumigating) buildings and for bleaching cloth" (Encyclopedia Britannica, page 536d). Gee, I wonder if spiritual brimstone might be used to PURIFY and fumigate people and bleach their darkened hearts to a bright white? Under the caption: "Methods of Production—Ancient producers described their method of obtaining sulfur from its ore as PURIFICATION BY FIRE" (Page 537a). (All caps emphasis is mine). "Purification by fire." That sounds very Biblical. Does God "purify" good and wonderful things by "fire?" Yes, He does: The WORDS of the Lord are pure words: as silver [silver? Isn't the silver qualities of our character also tried in 'fire,' I Cor. 3:12-13?] tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times" (Psalm 12:6). Now we all know that the very "words" of God are not burned in a literal fire. But "AS" silver is tried in literal fire, so SPIRITUALLY God's words are tried in spiritual fire.

But surely, according to what we have been told by doomsday prophets of eternal hell, sulfur must cause great torturing pain when brought into contact with human skin, and wouldn't the smell alone be enough to suffocate all in its presence? Continuing: "Physical Properties—Sulfur is TASTELESS and ODORLESS. IT HAS NO ACTION ON THE SKIN" (Page 537d)!

So maybe it's just the heat that is intensified by the use of sulfur, and that is its purpose in the lake of fire—to increase the intensity of the fire's heat to cause more insane pain? Continuing: "Physical Properties—Sulfur is A POOR CONDUCTOR OF BOTH HEAT and electricity..." (Page 538a)! Imagine that—a POOR CONDUCTOR OF HEAT! Theoretically, if God were to put enough brimstone into the lake of fire it would protect those in the fire like an asbestos suit! Is anyone beginning to see the sheer folly in the church's teaching that the lake of fire and brimstone are literal? I sure hope so.

NO, brimstone is not the demon of hell fire that it has been portrayed. Sulfur rather has hundreds and hundreds of beneficial uses (my Twentieth Century Dictionary says, 'innumerable uses') not the least of which are purification and medicines. But wait, there's more. Why do we find sulfur in the lake of fire? If it serves no detrimental purpose, is it possible that it serves a beneficial purpose? I think that we can all agree that the Bible uses the word "fire" in a figurative way on many occasions. I am certain that none would consider the following verses as using fire in a literal way:

Anyway, if that's true, then why have I heard of "sulfur fires" which form a "lava-like pool". Like here:

http://www.wood.army.mil/ENGRMAG/PDFs%20for%20Jul-Sept%2003/Ohara.pdf

(Note: I not trying to discredit Ray, nor the Bible. I'm just wondering because some people have told me that the brimstone in the LoF is to make the fire "hotter". They also said that burning sulfur makes a toxic fume to... make the LoF more horrible? IDK.)

What is this? I don't quite understand what sulfur is, or what exactly Revelation is referring too. Can anyone help? Thank you.

Hello Bryant,

The first thing to understand is the fact that the Lake of Fire is not literal fire with literal brimstone/sulfur. The Lake of Fire is LIKE fire and brimstone, in certain ways. You can take some time to read LOF Part 1 (http://bible-truths.com/lake1.html) for more about understanding biblical metaphors.

The brimstone in the Lake of Fire symbolizes purification. As Ray notes regarding sulfur, in earlier records of many countries, sulfur was used in religious ceremonies, for purifying (fumigating) buildings and for bleaching cloth. But again, literal sulfur is not in the Lake of Fire but the Lake of Fire nonetheless has attributes LIKE literal sulfur.

The Book of Revelation is a book of symbols [...he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John (Rev 1:1)]. All of the symbolism used in Revelation has a higher spiritual meaning, none are literal.


Hope this helps,

Marques

[eggi]

Hi Lupac,

I can't quite understand why he quoted that verse; Do you forsake your father and mother by believing that they are in Hell???

Did Christ say that we should forsake our parents? OF COURSE NOT!

"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me;"

Christ has told us to HONOR our parents!

In Mark 7 we read about how Jesus reprimands the Pharisees for their sins. The very first thing he mentions is:

Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye. (Mark 7:7-13)


My opinion is that not caring about the possibility that your parents are suffering for all eternity in real fire, is as heartless as you can get towards your parents. Christ commands us to LOVE our parents. If you couldn't care less if your parents were tortured for all eternity, I would say that you don't love them AT ALL. I have noticed this attitude in some of these so called evangelicals; use Jesus as an excuse for not caring if other people (even your parents) are being burned in real fire for all eternity. It is DESPICABLE! They NULLIFY the Word of God!


God bless you,
Eirik

[Lupac]

Okay, one other thing. Has anyone ever been to this site?

***no teaching links***

He has many articles, a couple "refuting" Ray, others about hell, which he believes is "eternal shame". Anyway, he argues in a couple of of his papers that aionios means eternal, but makes one critical mistake, in that he said there is no greek word that means eternal, well, he's wrong because I found a greek word that means eternal. It is "aidios", but even in the book it's used, (Jude, referring to the chaining of angels, or something. I don't really know what it's talking about.) it doesn't seem to mean "forever and ever and... ever" because the angels are being held with "eternal" chains until, God, does something with them. (LoF anyone?) Well, anyway, aidios does mean eternal or endless, (Because it can have a beginning.) so that blows his argument right there.

This guy really doesn't scare me, he used to, but I think God's helping me overcome these things. But has Ray ever replied to him?

EDIT: Okay, maybe I lied a little. It does kind of scare me. I need to pray, and go over Ray's writings some more. But non of what this guy is saying is true, is it? Thanks.
EDIT 2: Sorry, I wasn't saying his view was true or anything, and it was relevant to Ray.

[Kat]

Hi Lupac,

Jude 1:6 Besides, messengers who keep not their own sovereignty, but leave their own habitation, He has kept in imperceptible bonds under gloom for the judging of the great day." (CLV)

imperceptible - not perceptible; esp : too slight to be perceived. (Merriam-Webster)

http://www.forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,2657.0.html ---

I have answered this question many times. "Aidios" assuredly DOES NOT mean "eternal." It means imperceptible or invisable.  It has two elements "A" = not, and "idios" = see or perceive. Hence "not see or not perceive."  What can BE seen in creation attests to what CANNOT BE SEEN in God's achievements.  The bonds of the angels are not visible and literal physical chains, but "imperceptible" chains. It is very similar to the word "h - ades," which is also un perceive, hence unseen or imperceptible.

God be with you,
Ray

[Deborah-Leigh]

Hi Lupac
Kathy brought the best answer quoting Ray and not only that, but notice how Ray's answer is backed by Scripture and a second witness. Ref:

           TWELVE GOD-GIVEN TRUTHS TO UNDERSTAND HIS WORD
                                 TRUTH NUMBER 6
 [A] "...that in the mouth of TWO OR THREE WITNESSES every word may be established" (Matt. 18:16).
  "...In the mouth of TWO OR THREE WITNESSES shall every word be established" (II Cor. 13:1).
 [C] "And I will give power unto my TWO WITNESSES..." (Rev. 11:3). Unquote...

Ray applies the above God given Truth to not only understand but also to irrefutably establish, pronounce, report and expound the truth about the word "Aidios"
Ray teaches that quote : We are to have at least a second witness to establish a Scriptural truth or doctrine.

So what is the second witness to Jude 1 : 6?  Notice how Ray replies in the e-mail Kat posted. Notice how Ray's answer is backed by Scripture.

Rom 1:20  For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes-his eternal power and divine nature-have been understood and observed by what he made, so that people are without excuse.

If you apply the second witness principle to determine what the correct, true, rightly divided  meaning is for the word "Aidios" perhaps you can see how Rom 1 :20 reveals that the Greek  Strongs concordance TRANSLATION for the word "Aidios"   is NOT correct.  

The Greek word "Aidios"  appears only twice throughout the Scriptures so the second witness is clear and the meaning is established as Ray irrefutably expounds.