Divorce and suicide

[PowPow]

When you stand before God for judgement how can you be sure "Christ stands before Him on your behalf?"

I believe that God can look into your Heart and Soul and know who you are and judge you base on that. You may believe that Jesus does the same when he decides to whether to stand by our side or not.

Tim

Hebrews 9:24-28 (ESV): "24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. 25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, 26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him."

[dtknowles]

Hebrews 9:24-28 (ESV): "24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. 25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, 26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him."

Will Christ appear on behalf of everyone or only those who have demonstrated their love of God by acting according to Christ's teachings. Certainly there will be some for whom Christ will not stand..

Tim

[PowPow]

Will Christ appear on behalf of everyone or only those who have demonstrated their love of God by acting according to Christ's teachings. Certainly there will be some for whom Christ will not stand..

Tim

Christ appears on behalf of those who God has chosen. Romans 8:28-30(NIV): "28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified."

[dtknowles]

Christ appears on behalf of those who God has chosen. Romans 8:28-30(NIV): "28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified."

So judgement day is just a formality, our spot in heaven was determined before we are even born. It is predestined and nothing we do in this life changes that. Great joy to those who feel they have been called. Judgement is not judgement is was selection. Glory to God that he has chosen you for it was not of your doing. It must feel so good to be one of those called.

Tim

[1hole]

So judgement day is just a formality, our spot in heaven was determined before we are even born. It is predestined and nothing we do in this life changes that. Great joy to those who feel they have been called. Judgement is not judgement is was selection. Glory to God that he has chosen you for it was not of your doing. It must feel so good to be one of those called.

Tim

Tim, you casually raise deep questions of Christian doctrine that you know little of and obviously understand less.

God knows all things and always has, he didn't need to sit around for any of us to be born so he would know who was/is "predestined" for salvation.

God finds no happiness in the death of anyone but he does not force anyone to make a decision either for or against him. Fact is, He stands at the door and knocks, no one who calls on the name of Jesus will be turned away - even you! (It's in the Book)

"Judgement Day" is badly understood, it's NOT to determine who is in and who is out; we each make the eternal "IN" or "OUT" decision for ourselves and our choice is sealed on the day our bodies die (John 3:17, 18). All Judgement Day determines is what heavenly rewards or hellish penalties we will receive for what we do in this life.

And, yeah, we who have chosen "IN" do feel good about it.

Your motives are odd. You seem determined to try to punch holes in what you know nothing of and we do. It won't work of course but I have to wonder why people who feel like you are also often determined to bother with presumed "simple minded dummies" like us.

Perhaps you're also one of the chosen and really aren't as sure we're wrong as you would like for us to believe???

[PowPow]

I had nearly all of those same questions that Tim has asked and more. They were all stuffed in my head waiting for answers. About 15 years ago a miracle happened to me. For some reason, I decided to read the Bible cover to cover. I took my time, but at the end of that journey, I had my answers. I call myself a Christian today. I go to church regularly. I became a Deacon 2 years ago. I think this happened, because God wanted to open my eyes to His purpose for me. The best source of answers I know to these types of questions now is God's own infallible word - not in my thinking. My thinking is what allowed me to stay in the dark for so long in the first place.

[cainttype]

[QUOTE=PowPow;4685696]
This one deserves a direct quote of John 3:16-18 (NIV): "16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son." [end quote]


(Quote)
John 3:16-18 King James Version (KJV)

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
(End Quote)


Since words matter, which is why people find “discussing/debating” interesting...
1) Why would you think those quotes have been changed?
2) Who do you think “thought” reinterpreting them made good sense?
3) When do you think the decision was made to change the language?

When some people read the Bible with an open mind they can reasonably reach completely different conclusions from those that read it knowing the outcome ahead of time.

[1hole]

[QUOTE=cainttype;4686856]

......Since words matter, which is why people find “discussing/debating” interesting...
1) Why would you think those quotes have been changed?
2) Who do you think “thought” reinterpreting them made good sense?
3) When do you think the decision was made to change the language?

First, words matter but Peter, Paul and John didn't speak in Shakesperian English so the words MUST be changed or we couldn't understand the Bible at all. Next, other languages have such different sentence structures that we couldn't grasp the original meanings without restructuring, and it's God's meanings that count.

I know of no Christian doctrine that's affected by the few known word and sentence changes in any mainstream Bible version since the 1611 KJV. In fact it seems the newer grammar changes alone have made the Bible a lot easier to read and much more clear! (I've seen a reprinted copy of the original KJV. Believe me, very few of us would be able to make sense out of it, those old guys talked weird!)

[cainttype]

Dictionary defined...
Begotten: A somewhat old fashioned adjective, begotten is the past participle of the verb beget, which means to father or produce as offspring. You might recognize this word from John 3:16, one of the most popular and most often quoted bible verses: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

There IS a difference, plain to see...
The original refers to God’s only son “begotten” of mankind... It does not say anything about “God’s one and only son”.
The change was implemented because honest, open-minded people knew the references to “Sons of God”, those that held council with God when Lucifer was in attendance.

A person with no prior knowledge of preconceived Biblical “facts” would have no choice but to think that there are multiple “Sons of God”, and that Jesus was the only one “begotten” by man.... That’s what it says.
Changing the text was an effort to avoid having to explain that either the text was wrong, it was some sort of unknowable mystery, the previous “Sons” were angels (or whatever mythological interpretation they might be assigned), or that somebody was changing the meaning to suit their own ideology... Your choice.

Reading the Bible in context, without prejudice, can result in honest disagreements on the meaning and purpose of much of the text... But that’s why God gave us brains, a way to think on our own without relying on “facts” (which may or may not be accurate) that are commonly quoted, or misquoted, by those that strive to convince us of their own ideology.

[PowPow]

If we're going to debate translations, NIV would not be my first choice. Neither would the KJV. Actually, I'm a fan of the ESV, GNT, NKJV, NLT, and whatever other versions help me to understand a given part of scripture. I have 17 or 18 of them in my phone app. I tend to quote from NIV and ESV most, but you know what? Quoting from these seems to me to be on much firmer ground than simply relying on one's own thinking. Would you not agree?

[PowPow]

Okay, so we should only quote from KJV when we're trying to spread God's word. Only genuine KJV gets the point across in the way God intended. That is absurd! Even the original Hebrew and Greek differ from scribe to scribe. The folks who do translations these days know the individual styles of each scribe, their common mistakes, and account for them. That's where the passage of time and further research have actually improved the exegetics over earlier efforts like the KJV. I do believe that NIV suffers from translation by committee. If that is your objection, you're not alone. But, that doesn't mean it is not any less the Holy Bible. If you don't like a given translation, by all means get another. Like I said, I have 17 or 18 of them on my phone alone. If you want more, you can find them easily. I find translation criticism to be pointless in this day where the Bible is so READILY available in any form, paper or electronic, language, and translation.

To anyone reading this who has not yet read the Bible: If you choose to read the Bible for the first time, just find one. Read it. Don't worry about which translation it is. There will be plenty of time to read other translations and worry about the translation differences. That is all in the noise.

[cainttype]

You could quote from a cereal box if you wanted, but the question of accuracy goes to the closest to the original.
Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic are all known, well understood languages. There are no confusing words, just text that might confuse a reader with contradictory ideas.

The word “begotten” was no accident, why is it missing now?
The answer is irrelevant, but the truth is that the text was changed.... So something, somewhere, is wrong... period.

Ask the average Bible-quoter for a simple explanation of why Adam and Eve were ejected from The Garden of Eden, say 10 words or less, and then consider why they think the way they do.
The Bible as written is oddly confusing to too many, too often.... Why?
I think that people search for what they’ve been told is the truth, and often have to resort to “It’s a mystery” when they can’t find it... At the same time, they pass over things that seem at odds with those “truths” that they know are hidden there... somewhere... because questioning such things would be.... bad.

[UKShootist]

If we're going to debate translations, NIV would not be my first choice. Neither would the KJV. Actually, I'm a fan of the ESV, GNT, NKJV, NLT, and whatever other versions help me to understand a given part of scripture. I have 17 or 18 of them in my phone app. I tend to quote from NIV and ESV most, but you know what? Quoting from these seems to me to be on much firmer ground than simply relying on one's own thinking. Would you not agree?

Words flavour interpretation. Here's a simple example. 'All men are equal'. A fine and noble sentiment which few would argue against in any material way. 'Equal' means 'The same', yes? "All men are the same" doesn't quite hit the same spot but we've all heard it.

The argument I read here about the interpretation of the bible remind me so much of those I heard in court for 32 years of lawyers each trying to prove their point, their points being equal and opposite! If your God is a nice chap that knows everything then he can see into your soul, and any God worthy of the name that looks into a man's soul and sees a good and honest man that has lived as good a life as well as he has been able to could not condemn him to eternal hell for simply not believing the word of man. The Bible is the word of man, this words being chosen by men from many more available, then interpreted (see above) many times over. By the same token, it is generally accepted that God has given free will to men and doesn't interfere (apart from the odd flood and destruction of cities etc) so it is entirely possible that the words written by men could be slightly false?

If you have true faith in your God then you should have faith that He will judge you according to your life. Furthermore, if He knows how each sparrow falls he surely knows everything about you already so you are already being tried and judge, the sentence only being delivered to your face at the end of it. If I was to offer any advice at all it would be (well, it WILL be, ignored!) but here it is. If you need the religious equivalent of a lawyer, i.e. a pastor, to interpret the 'laws' for you then you are done for already. I have read here of some who have changed churches because they didn't approve of the pastor they had so they went and found another. What does that say about the word of man? If you have faith, then have FAITH.

That's ten minutes of my life I will never get back!

[Thundarstick]

I'm not sure if UKS realizes it, but he does hit on the idea of "legalism" that is so pervasive in some churches. Where one would strive to meet the letter of the law, while ignoring the spirit of the law, and miss the mark entirely! This very thing was a huge problem with the old law, where you start with 10 commandments from God, then man turns it into something not even God in the flesh could keep to the man made standard, ie threshing on the Sabbath.

The original question would then become, are we seeking to please God, because we love him, or, are we seeking to to meet the letter of the law, because we fear him and punishment? We would do well to weigh all our questions against the standard of love vs legalism.

[UKShootist]

The original question would then become, are we seeking to please God, because we love him, or, are we seeking to to meet the letter of the law, because we fear him and punishment?

Or seeking to trump their neighbour's virtue signalling with their own? The enthusiasm of the self righteous is a terrible thing.

[Thundarstick]

Or seeking to trump their neighbour's virtue signalling with their own? The enthusiasm of the self righteous is a terrible thing.

Perhaps I'm wasting my time with this, but perhaps you are unaware of these scriptures.
Gal 5:19-23

The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

These warns us of what we shouldn't be, and what we should be seeking to be. I wanted to especially direct your attention toward the last sentence. There is no law against practicing the spiritual fruits, no matter your belief, language, or country, and I'll contend this is where humanities concept of "good" comes from.

[UKShootist]

Perhaps I'm wasting my time with this, but perhaps you are unaware of these scriptures.
Gal 5:19-23

The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

These warns us of what we shouldn't be, and what we should be seeking to be. I wanted to especially direct your attention toward the last sentence. There is no law against practicing the spiritual fruits, no matter your belief, language, or country, and I'll contend this is where humanities concept of "good" comes from.

Honest discussion never wastes time. The words "I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God." appear to exclude from the possibility of heaven anyone who has lead a debauched (by some standards) life even though they may, even upon their death bed, accept Jesus as their saviour and honestly regret all those 'sins' they committed throughout their three score and ten years. Yet that saving grace of accepting Jesus is specifically promised as the only and absolute means of gaining entrance to heaven.

Once again, it descends into lawyers arguments upon religion rather than faith. All religious arguments, without exception, end with the statement "Because it says so in this book." There are so many books, each saying so many different things, each thing often having several different interpretations depending upon what the quoter wishes to 'prove'. Each book having so many people willing to go to their death rather than accept that their chosen book might be wrong. For anyone quoting religious text, they should google the term "Bias confirmation". It explains a lot.

Are we to accept that Jesus, supposedly the perfect man, a God in human form (Briefly) who knows everything about everyone already, will face a man who has lead a good and honest life by every Christian standard save for accepting Jesus as his saviour, will tell that good and decent man that he must spend all eternity in hell, suffering the agonies of that place for simply not accepting Jesus, while he holds open the gates of heaven for a mass murderer of children who found and accepted Jesus while in the condemned cell? Really? Yet this is the utter nonsense some 'book christians' will present as Christianity. Personally, I think that those so called Christians will be in for a bit of a shock come Judgement Day, if such a thing ever happens.

Where in such beliefs is the love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control?

[Thundarstick]

"Where in such beliefs is the love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control?"

This is indeed a valid question to pose to followers. I'm not trying to convince you to believe, I'm just sharing why I believe. You are a free agent, as are all of us, peace be with you friend.

[PowPow]

Honest discussion never wastes time. The words "I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God." appear to exclude from the possibility of heaven anyone who has lead a debauched (by some standards) life even though they may, even upon their death bed, accept Jesus as their saviour and honestly regret all those 'sins' they committed throughout their three score and ten years. Yet that saving grace of accepting Jesus is specifically promised as the only and absolute means of gaining entrance to heaven.

Perhaps you've heard the mantra, "accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior". This idea that one could choose salvation, had to choose, or needed to do anything to be saved just didn't jive with my reading of scripture. Saving faith is not something that we have a choice in. It is something we are given. Is it possible for a man living alone on an island, no contact with the outside world at all, no Bible, no direct knowledge of Jesus, etc. to be saved? Absolutely, if you read scripture. ("no" if you think he has to accept something he doesn't know about)

Salvation is a gift from God, it's not something we have a choice in. If you receive God's grace in salvation, you're not going to say "No thanks, God, I've got this on my own" to the greatest power in the universe. You can't. it is a life changing gift, and you know something has changed. It is irresistible. How did I know? It was really simply a new curiosity to learn more and more about God, His word, His plan for us, and a desire to stay close to Him. It's a different experience for everyone. If I had not received God's grace, I would probably have lived this life with me and only me at the helm, dead in my sin.

Here is a list of scripture references that I suggest you read (the first two in particular) that should completely void the "accept" idea for you, but I won't quote them here to save the Bible translation discussion round two: John 15:16, John 6:44, 1 Peter 2:2-5, 1 John 4:10, Ephesians 4:1-8.

[1hole]

"....that saving grace of accepting Jesus is specifically promised as the only and absolute means of gaining entrance to heaven."

Perhaps you've heard the mantra, "accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior". ..... This idea that one could choose salvation, had to choose, or needed to do anything to be saved just didn't jive with my reading of scripture. Saving faith is not something that we have a choice in. It is something we are given.

Only if "other" gods exist (they don't) AND if those gods have heavens of their own making (they don't) then an argument could be made that our God's way is only one of many ways. Until then, we are wise to recognise that Jesus is the only way into the God of the Bible's heaven simply because He has told us so.

Jesus' spiritual salvation is free and receiving it is a spiritual choice, not an action. It certainly isn't something earned on a sliding scale by "being good". Instead, salvation is a costly bought and paid for gift that Jesus offers to sinners (that's all of us), A declined gift has no value to anyone. God offers us a gift beyond price and our choice is to accept or decline it but it can't be earned by anything we can do.

Even a 'free" gift has to be paid for by someone who can pay the price but, for it to mean anything, even a free a gift has to be accepted. Jesus paid for the gift he now freely offers to us ... IF we will take it.

In human terms, let's say my bank suddenly and freely offers $100 million to all who want it, a magnificent gift offer that will be effective up to closing time at some unannounced later date. Those who gratefully take the gift are suddenly rich but those who ignore it, or choose to spitefully reject it, or wait too long to take it, simply won't ever receive the promised gift.

Gratefully accepting a spiritual gift really isn't an activity. And, IF we could possibly have ever earned our salvation, we wouldn't have needed it to be a gift!

No one should agonize about those who never had a chance to hear the good news, or about how some people claim to be Christian but don't show it, etc. All of that - and much more - is in God's area of responsibility; I am calmly confident he can and will deal with them fairly.

Bottom line; Each of us should be concerned about what actually applies to us. After all, we who have heard the good news of the gospel are (only) responsible for how we handle it for ourselves. I have happily chosen to take my own prepaid "spiritual gift card" and pray others will as well.