Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 3,107 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 2,388,498
Pageviews Today: 3,305,135Threads Today: 797Posts Today: 14,695
10:22 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either

 
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/12/2012 01:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
a while back we were talking about the first and second death. it is my comprehension of these scriptures that the garden situation was the "first death"

and the second death, is what happens at judgment day (for some).

i think you were saying that the first death is when man actually physically dies. and we seemed to agree on the second death?
 Quoting: Salt

Yes, I believe that the first death is normal mortality, while the second is eternal separation of the soul from God.

...an afterthought...

Eve left the garden because her "desire was for her husband and that he would rule over her"

?
 Quoting: Salt


I have to disagree with this one. She "desired" her husband, but not for the purpose of having him rule over her. I see what God told her as a warning, like "Are you sure you want to follow Adam? Because he'll rule over you if you do." From Eve's perspective, she would be ruled over no matter what; the only question was the identity of the ruler. She knew God's rule as benevolent, but Adam's rule was unknown, and she had no experience to tell her how very malevolent it would be.
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


ok, so be patient with me here. i am not a programmer so my logic skills might not be as razor sharp as yours....

so, if the first death was mortality, then why were they also prevented from eating of the tree of life?

to me, it seems that Adam was told he would return to the dust. is this not the same thing as mortality?

and, when God told them that if they ate the fruit, they (both of them) would die (mortality).

they ate, they became mortal. THEN, they are also prevented from eating of the tree of life.

i'm confused here.
jacksprat

User ID: 1420740
Canada
10/12/2012 02:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
there is no hell, only in the mind and thoughts

hell is here on Planet Earth in 3rd dimension


or lower 4th dimension or astral realm

we create our reality with our thoughts

hell is only an illusion
jacksprat
Keep2theCode

User ID: 20545539
United States
10/12/2012 02:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
ok, so be patient with me here. i am not a programmer so my logic skills might not be as razor sharp as yours....

so, if the first death was mortality, then why were they also prevented from eating of the tree of life?

to me, it seems that Adam was told he would return to the dust. is this not the same thing as mortality?

and, when God told them that if they ate the fruit, they (both of them) would die (mortality).

they ate, they became mortal. THEN, they are also prevented from eating of the tree of life.

i'm confused here.
 Quoting: Salt


hf

Only Adam was forbidden to eat of the Tree of Life (abbrev. ToL), and it was because he alone rebelled to the point of blaming God for his sin. Eating of the ToL would be required due to their mortality as a result of both of them eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (abbrev. TKGE).

As for mortality and returning to dust, you may be wondering how this could apply to Eve who had never been dust. We aren't told what state Eve would have "returned" to had she somehow stayed in the garden yet did not eat of the ToL. But it seems absurd to think she would not have eaten of the ToL, so it's likely a moot point.

All we get from the text is that "in the day you eat of it, you will surely die", without any more detail as to what "surely die" meant. We can only note that eating of the ToL would be the antidote, and I have a hard time accepting that spiritual life can come from eating fruit.

So they became mortal (able to die), and would need to eat of the fruit of the ToL to prevent the inevitable actual death. Mortality is the ability, not the end result. Adam and Eve thus had the possibility of dying, whereas before sin they did not. Contrast this with "immortal"; it means "cannot die", not simply "is alive". Does that help?
Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? (Gal. 4:16)
Keep2theCode

User ID: 20545539
United States
10/12/2012 02:17 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
there is no hell, only in the mind and thoughts

hell is here on Planet Earth in 3rd dimension


or lower 4th dimension or astral realm

we create our reality with our thoughts

hell is only an illusion
 Quoting: jacksprat


Lemme fix this for ya:

The 4th dimension or astral realm is only an illusion. We can only create thoughts with our thoughts.

There. Hey, one assertion's as good as another...
Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? (Gal. 4:16)
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/12/2012 02:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
ok, so be patient with me here. i am not a programmer so my logic skills might not be as razor sharp as yours....

so, if the first death was mortality, then why were they also prevented from eating of the tree of life?

to me, it seems that Adam was told he would return to the dust. is this not the same thing as mortality?

and, when God told them that if they ate the fruit, they (both of them) would die (mortality).

they ate, they became mortal. THEN, they are also prevented from eating of the tree of life.

i'm confused here.
 Quoting: Salt


hf

Only Adam was forbidden to eat of the Tree of Life (abbrev. ToL), and it was because he alone rebelled to the point of blaming God for his sin. Eating of the ToL would be required due to their mortality as a result of both of them eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (abbrev. TKGE).

As for mortality and returning to dust, you may be wondering how this could apply to Eve who had never been dust. We aren't told what state Eve would have "returned" to had she somehow stayed in the garden yet did not eat of the ToL. But it seems absurd to think she would not have eaten of the ToL, so it's likely a moot point.

All we get from the text is that "in the day you eat of it, you will surely die", without any more detail as to what "surely die" meant. We can only note that eating of the ToL would be the antidote, and I have a hard time accepting that spiritual life can come from eating fruit.

So they became mortal (able to die), and would need to eat of the fruit of the ToL to prevent the inevitable actual death. Mortality is the ability, not the end result. Adam and Eve thus had the possibility of dying, whereas before sin they did not. Contrast this with "immortal"; it means "cannot die", not simply "is alive". Does that help?
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


so, then it is interesting that the serpent went to Eve about eating from the tree of knowledge. why would it be important to the serpent for Eve to eat of it?
Keep2theCode

User ID: 20545539
United States
10/12/2012 02:34 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
so, then it is interesting that the serpent went to Eve about eating from the tree of knowledge. why would it be important to the serpent for Eve to eat of it?
 Quoting: Salt


We aren't told explicitly, but as I said, it seems likely that she could be tricked into it. Maybe Adam would only eat it if Eve did or something, like he was codependent?

But the larger question is why the serpent wanted either or both of them to sin at all. Again we're not told, but from the whole of scripture I have a scenario I think is plausible:

When Jesus was being tempted by Satan, at one point He was offered all the world's kingdoms. Jesus didn't challenge the offer, but why? The only answer is that they all really did belong to Satan. How did he acquire the world? IMHO, in the Garden of Eden by getting people to turn against the rule of God.

This seems to have put the whole world under Satan's jurisdiction, which would explain why it's so bad. It would also explain why Jesus had to redeem or ransom us to get us back. And this in turn may be why blood was required: that was Satan's price, and it had to come from a sinless person. But what Satan didn't anticipate was God's ingenious solution: to become that sinless person Himself, as he alluded to in promising a savior through the seed of Eve, who has been the supreme object of Satan's hatred all this time.
Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? (Gal. 4:16)
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/12/2012 02:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
so, then it is interesting that the serpent went to Eve about eating from the tree of knowledge. why would it be important to the serpent for Eve to eat of it?
 Quoting: Salt


We aren't told explicitly, but as I said, it seems likely that she could be tricked into it. Maybe Adam would only eat it if Eve did or something, like he was codependent?

But the larger question is why the serpent wanted either or both of them to sin at all. Again we're not told, but from the whole of scripture I have a scenario I think is plausible:

When Jesus was being tempted by Satan, at one point He was offered all the world's kingdoms. Jesus didn't challenge the offer, but why? The only answer is that they all really did belong to Satan. How did he acquire the world? IMHO, in the Garden of Eden by getting people to turn against the rule of God.

This seems to have put the whole world under Satan's jurisdiction, which would explain why it's so bad. It would also explain why Jesus had to redeem or ransom us to get us back. And this in turn may be why blood was required: that was Satan's price, and it had to come from a sinless person. But what Satan didn't anticipate was God's ingenious solution: to become that sinless person Himself, as he alluded to in promising a savior through the seed of Eve, who has been the supreme object of Satan's hatred all this time.
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


it seems to me that satan had an "in" with Eve for some technicalities. i think satan wanted them to sin in a way that would mirror his own sin (to rise above God). not sure, here. indeed, the target was to destroy eve so the savior could not be borne thru her. but, deeper than that, there seems to be other issues.

regarding the temptation of Jesus - that is an interesting view. this is what i always thought:

Jesus' temptation was not for the kingdoms, but for avoiding the cross to get to them.
Keep2theCode

User ID: 20545539
United States
10/12/2012 02:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
it seems to me that satan had an "in" with Eve for some technicalities. i think satan wanted them to sin in a way that would mirror his own sin (to rise above God). not sure, here. indeed, the target was to destroy eve so the savior could not be borne thru her. but, deeper than that, there seems to be other issues.

regarding the temptation of Jesus - that is an interesting view. this is what i always thought:

Jesus' temptation was not for the kingdoms, but for avoiding the cross to get to them.
 Quoting: Salt


I'd need something to go on, some kind of justification, for seeing anything going on between Eve and the serpent before the meeting in the garden and "her husband with her". Seems to me that since Adam alone was told to guard the place, that he would be the one in collusion with the serpent.

BTW, think of what a "help" Eve turned out to be. The word is "ezer kenegdo", "a strong one facing him", and is used also for God in regard to Israel on several occasions. She was his ally, his partner, coming to lend him aid because of something he lacked. When God said the savior would come through her seed, that is the ultimate "ezer", IMHO. God created her to be the solution to the plot He knew Satan was about to hatch. (So maybe that's why Satan targeted her first, to take out Adam's guard!)
Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? (Gal. 4:16)
X^24

User ID: 21584439
Northern Mariana Islands
10/12/2012 03:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
...

I gave a link to an article I wrote about original sin, rather than copy it all here, esp. since it really is stretching the topic too much IMHO. I think we've reached an impasse about whether there are any 2nd chances and don't see the point in continuing about that.

[link to www.godlikeproductions.com]
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


yes, i read it. thanks.
my question, after reading the link was:

regarding Genesis 2 & 3:
what other reason for preventing them from eating of the tree of life would there be if they only suffered a physical death.
 Quoting: Salt


Hi,

By tree of life do you mean the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? Here is a snippet from an in-depth article that explains it all very well for those that have an ear that can hear.

Most Christians denominations teach that Adam and Eve were wicked people because they violated God's commandment not to eat the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Yet, that is not what God Himself said. He declared, "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil" (Gen. 3:22). God knows the difference between good and evil, but Adam and Eve didn't when they were first created. The reason why God created this earth was to allow us the opportunity to become more like Him and inherit all that He has (Rev.21:7). But in order to achieve this lofty objective it was necessary for man to learn about and distinguish between good and evil. However, the only way to do that is through personal experience.

But man could not do that while he lived in heaven with God, the Father of our spirits, because evil cannot exist there. Furthermore, since God is all good, it is against His character to teach us evil. But without a knowledge of evil, it is not possible for us to fully understand good ... - [link to www.14lds.com]
 Quoting: X^24


there were many trees, but two specifically identified:

Genesis 2:8 Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9 The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Then:
15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

18 The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

Then over in Genesis 3 (after they ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil):


3 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”

2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”

4 “You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5 “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the Lord God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the Lord God called to the man, “Where are you?”

10 He answered, “I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid.”

11 And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?”

12 The man said, “The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”

13 Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?”

The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

14 So the Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this,

“Cursed are you above all livestock
and all wild animals!
You will crawl on your belly
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity
between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
he will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel.”

16 To the woman he said,

“I will make your pains in childbearing very severe;
with painful labor you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you.”

17 To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’

“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”

20 Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.

21 The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. 22 And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” 23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. 24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side[e] of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.
 Quoting: Salt


KJV, Genesis 2

16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. - [link to www.lds.org]

They are only forbidden to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. After expulsion, being deprived of eating from the tree of life (as the name implies) may be what caused them to die?

Adam's choice of Eve's name is also indicative of a foregone conclusion i.e. to enable mens progression.
The deception continues to crumble.
Thread: Tips for improving the GLP experience.
Christ was mischaracterized to the point of Crucifixion.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 10858311
United States
10/12/2012 05:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
 Quoting: Keep2theCode

I think this addresses some things in your article.
What is the origin of Christendom’s belief in an immaterial, immortal soul?
“The Christian concept of a spiritual soul created by God and infused into the body at conception to make man a living whole is the fruit of a long development in Christian philosophy. Only with Origen [died c. 254 C.E.] in the East and St. Augustine [died 430 C.E.] in the West was the soul established as a spiritual substance and a philosophical concept formed of its nature. . . . His [Augustine’s] doctrine . . . owed much (including some shortcomings) to Neoplatonism.”—New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Vol. XIII, pp. 452, 454.

“The concept of immortality is a product of Greek thinking, whereas the hope of a resurrection belongs to Jewish thought. . . . Following Alexander’s conquests Judaism gradually absorbed Greek concepts.”—Dictionnaire Encyclopédique de la Bible (Valence, France; 1935), edited by Alexandre Westphal, Vol. 2, p. 557.

“Immortality of the soul is a Greek notion formed in ancient mystery cults and elaborated by the philosopher Plato.”—Presbyterian Life, May 1, 1970, p. 35.
“Do we believe that there is such a thing as death? . . . Is it not the separation of soul and body? And to be dead is the completion of this; when the soul exists in herself, and is released from the body and the body is released from the soul, what is this but death? . . . And does the soul admit of death? No. Then the soul is immortal? Yes.”—Plato’s “Phaedo,” Secs. 64, 105, as published in Great Books of the Western World (1952), edited by R. M. Hutchins, Vol. 7, pp. 223, 245, 246.

“The problem of immortality, we have seen, engaged the serious attention of the Babylonian theologians. . . . Neither the people nor the leaders of religious thought ever faced the possibility of the total annihilation of what once was called into existence. Death was a passage to another kind of life.”—The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria (Boston, 1898), M. Jastrow, Jr., p. 556.
Keep2theCode

User ID: 20545539
United States
10/12/2012 05:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
 Quoting: Keep2theCode

I think this addresses some things in your article....
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10858311


Like what, exactly?

All your quotes do is question the origin of the concept of the soul, but this is about what the Bible says, not alternative theories outside of the Bible. We can't cover the full gamut of all philosophy in every thread.
Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? (Gal. 4:16)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 10858311
United States
10/12/2012 05:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
 Quoting: Keep2theCode

And these scriptures too, hopefully:
Is the soul the same as the spirit?
Eccl. 12:7: “Then the dust returns to the earth just as it happened to be and the spirit [or, life-force; Hebrew, ruach] itself returns to the true God who gave it.” (Notice that the Hebrew word for spirit is ruach; but the word translated soul is nephesh. The text does not mean that at death the spirit travels all the way to the personal presence of God; rather, any prospect for the person to live again rests with God. In similar usage, we may say that, if required payments are not made by the buyer of a piece of property, the property “returns” to its owner.) (KJ, AS, RS, NE, and Dy all here render ruach as “spirit.” NAB reads “life breath.”)

Eccl. 3:19: “There is an eventuality as respects the sons of mankind and an eventuality as respects the beast, and they have the same eventuality. As the one dies, so the other dies; and they all have but one spirit [Hebrew, ruach].” (Thus both mankind and beasts are shown to have the same ruach, or spirit. ]

Heb. 4:12: “The word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul [Greek, psy·khes; “life,” NE] and spirit [Greek, pneu;ma·tos], and of joints and their marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart.” (Observe that the Greek word for “spirit” is not the same as the word for “soul.”)

Does conscious life continue for a person after the spirit leaves the body?
Ps. 146:4: “His spirit [Hebrew, from ru;ach] goes out, he goes back to his ground; in that day his thoughts do perish.” (NAB, Ro, Yg, and Dy [145:4] here render ru;ach as “spirit.” Some translations say “breath.”)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 10858311
United States
10/12/2012 05:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


Eccl. 3:19-21: “There is an eventuality as respects the sons of mankind and an eventuality as respects the beast, and they have the same eventuality. As the one dies, so the other dies; and they all have but one spirit, so that there is no superiority of the man over the beast, for everything is vanity. All are going to one place. They have all come to be from the dust, and they are all returning to the dust. Who is there knowing the spirit of the sons of mankind, whether it is ascending upward; and the spirit of the beast, whether it is descending downward to the earth?” (Because of the inheritance of sin and death from Adam, humans all die and return to the dust, as animals do. But does each human have a spirit that goes on living as an intelligent personality after it ceases to function in the body? No; verse 19 answers that humans and beasts “all have but one spirit.” Based merely on human observation, no one can authoritatively answer the question raised in verse 21 regarding the spirit. But God’s Word answers that there is nothing that humans have as a result of birth that gives them superiority over beasts when they die. However, because of God’s merciful provision through Christ, the prospect of living forever has been opened up to humans who exercise faith, but not to animals. For many of mankind, that will be made possible by resurrection, when active life-force from God will invigorate them again.)

Luke 23:46: “Jesus called with a loud voice and said: ‘Father, into your hands I entrust my spirit [Greek, pneu′ma′].’ When he had said this, he expired.” (Notice that Jesus expired. When his spirit went out he was not on his way to heaven. Not until the third day from this was Jesus resurrected from the dead. Then, as Acts 1:3, 9 shows, it was 40 more days before he ascended to heaven. So, what is the meaning of what Jesus said at the time of his death? He was saying that he knew that, when he died, his future life prospects rested entirely with God.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 10858311
United States
10/12/2012 05:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
 Quoting: Keep2theCode

I think this addresses some things in your article....
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10858311


Like what, exactly?

All your quotes do is question the origin of the concept of the soul, but this is about what the Bible says, not alternative theories outside of the Bible. We can't cover the full gamut of all philosophy in every thread.
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


These ideas entered Christendom and Judaism about 200-100?BCE from Greek philosophers, because of the fashionability of same. I don't think that's enough of a pedigree for these concepts, and believe the idea of an immortal soul/spirit,which is now part of every religion in the world [but one],yet not part of the Bible, should be reconsidered.
Sola Scriptura for me, not those oh-so-prestigious ancient Greeks!
Keep2theCode

User ID: 20545539
United States
10/12/2012 06:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
These ideas entered Christendom and Judaism about 200-100?BCE from Greek philosophers, because of the fashionability of same. I don't think that's enough of a pedigree for these concepts, and believe the idea of an immortal soul/spirit,which is now part of every religion in the world [but one],yet not part of the Bible, should be reconsidered.
Sola Scriptura for me, not those oh-so-prestigious ancient Greeks!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10858311


I get my ideas about the soul from scripture.
Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? (Gal. 4:16)
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/12/2012 06:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
These ideas entered Christendom and Judaism about 200-100?BCE from Greek philosophers, because of the fashionability of same. I don't think that's enough of a pedigree for these concepts, and believe the idea of an immortal soul/spirit,which is now part of every religion in the world [but one],yet not part of the Bible, should be reconsidered.
Sola Scriptura for me, not those oh-so-prestigious ancient Greeks!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10858311


I get my ideas about the soul from scripture.
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


any thoughts on my post above about the temptation of Jesus re: kingdoms?
Keep2theCode

User ID: 20545539
United States
10/12/2012 06:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
These ideas entered Christendom and Judaism about 200-100?BCE from Greek philosophers, because of the fashionability of same. I don't think that's enough of a pedigree for these concepts, and believe the idea of an immortal soul/spirit,which is now part of every religion in the world [but one],yet not part of the Bible, should be reconsidered.
Sola Scriptura for me, not those oh-so-prestigious ancient Greeks!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10858311


I get my ideas about the soul from scripture.
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


any thoughts on my post above about the temptation of Jesus re: kingdoms?
 Quoting: Salt


Um... didn't I comment on that already? Or did I miss another question?
Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? (Gal. 4:16)
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/12/2012 06:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
it seems to me that satan had an "in" with Eve for some technicalities. i think satan wanted them to sin in a way that would mirror his own sin (to rise above God). not sure, here. indeed, the target was to destroy eve so the savior could not be borne thru her. but, deeper than that, there seems to be other issues.

regarding the temptation of Jesus - that is an interesting view. this is what i always thought:

Jesus' temptation was not for the kingdoms, but for avoiding the cross to get to them.
 Quoting: Salt


I'd need something to go on, some kind of justification, for seeing anything going on between Eve and the serpent before the meeting in the garden and "her husband with her". Seems to me that since Adam alone was told to guard the place, that he would be the one in collusion with the serpent.

BTW, think of what a "help" Eve turned out to be. The word is "ezer kenegdo", "a strong one facing him", and is used also for God in regard to Israel on several occasions. She was his ally, his partner, coming to lend him aid because of something he lacked. When God said the savior would come through her seed, that is the ultimate "ezer", IMHO. God created her to be the solution to the plot He knew Satan was about to hatch. (So maybe that's why Satan targeted her first, to take out Adam's guard!)
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


These ideas entered Christendom and Judaism about 200-100?BCE from Greek philosophers, because of the fashionability of same. I don't think that's enough of a pedigree for these concepts, and believe the idea of an immortal soul/spirit,which is now part of every religion in the world [but one],yet not part of the Bible, should be reconsidered.
Sola Scriptura for me, not those oh-so-prestigious ancient Greeks!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10858311


I get my ideas about the soul from scripture.
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


any thoughts on my post above about the temptation of Jesus re: kingdoms?
 Quoting: Salt


Um... didn't I comment on that already? Or did I miss another question?
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


i didn't see it if you did.
Keep2theCode

User ID: 20545539
United States
10/12/2012 06:31 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
i didn't see it if you did.
 Quoting: Salt


Well, I commented that Jesus' debate with Satan indicated that Satan had been given jurisdiction of the world, which is why IMHO he wanted people to sin. I'm not sure what else you wanted to know.
Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? (Gal. 4:16)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 10858311
United States
10/12/2012 06:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
so, then it is interesting that the serpent went to Eve about eating from the tree of knowledge. why would it be important to the serpent for Eve to eat of it?
 Quoting: Salt


We aren't told explicitly, but as I said, it seems likely that she could be tricked into it. Maybe Adam would only eat it if Eve did or something, like he was codependent?

But the larger question is why the serpent wanted either or both of them to sin at all. Again we're not told, but from the whole of scripture I have a scenario I think is plausible:

When Jesus was being tempted by Satan, at one point He was offered all the world's kingdoms. Jesus didn't challenge the offer, but why? The only answer is that they all really did belong to Satan. How did he acquire the world? IMHO, in the Garden of Eden by getting people to turn against the rule of God.

This seems to have put the whole world under Satan's jurisdiction, which would explain why it's so bad. It would also explain why Jesus had to redeem or ransom us to get us back. And this in turn may be why blood was required: that was Satan's price, and it had to come from a sinless person. But what Satan didn't anticipate was God's ingenious solution: to become that sinless person Himself, as he alluded to in promising a savior through the seed of Eve, who has been the supreme object of Satan's hatred all this time.
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


Agree with your last 2 paragraphs, except not that ransom had to be paid to Satan. I'll come back with more about that if anyone would like. Know mankind is technically "in slavery to sin and death",but not to Satan?, until ransomed. Satan is the hidden ruler of this world, but "is always transforming himself into an angel of light", so his non-benevolence is disguised. Maybe Adam was not deceived about the "sin and death" part, but was deceived about Satan's rulership, because he believed he was "now like God" and could rule himself without worrying what God thought about it, but didn't realize he'd really selected Satan to rule him and everyone to come. 1John 5:19
Keep2theCode

User ID: 20545539
United States
10/12/2012 06:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
Agree with your last 2 paragraphs, except not that ransom had to be paid to Satan. I'll come back with more about that if anyone would like. Know mankind is technically "in slavery to sin and death",but not to Satan?, until ransomed. Satan is the hidden ruler of this world, but "is always transforming himself into an angel of light", so his non-benevolence is disguised. Maybe Adam was not deceived about the "sin and death" part, but was deceived about Satan's rulership, because he believed he was "now like God" and could rule himself without worrying what God thought about it, but didn't realize he'd really selected Satan to rule him and everyone to come. 1John 5:19
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10858311


A ransom cannot be paid to an idea or concept, but only to a real personal being. We can speak of metaphorical meanings, but Jesus' sacrifice was quite literal, so it follows that the payee was also quite literal. Since Satan did indeed own the world, and not merely sin or death, it seems to me that this is a reasonable conclusion.
Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? (Gal. 4:16)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 10858311
United States
10/12/2012 07:13 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
it seems to me that satan had an "in" with Eve for some technicalities. i think satan wanted them to sin in a way that would mirror his own sin (to rise above God). not sure, here. indeed, the target was to destroy eve so the savior could not be borne thru her. but, deeper than that, there seems to be other issues.

regarding the temptation of Jesus - that is an interesting view. this is what i always thought:

Jesus' temptation was not for the kingdoms, but for avoiding the cross to get to them.
 Quoting: Salt


I'd need something to go on, some kind of justification, for seeing anything going on between Eve and the serpent before the meeting in the garden and "her husband with her". Seems to me that since Adam alone was told to guard the place, that he would be the one in collusion with the serpent.

BTW, think of what a "help" Eve turned out to be. The word is "ezer kenegdo", "a strong one facing him", and is used also for God in regard to Israel on several occasions. She was his ally, his partner, coming to lend him aid because of something he lacked. When God said the savior would come through her seed, that is the ultimate "ezer", IMHO. God created her to be the solution to the plot He knew Satan was about to hatch. (So maybe that's why Satan targeted her first, to take out Adam's guard!)
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


I [not that you asked] think the same thing I did back in August on Apollo's thread:
Re: What if Jesus would have taken the Devils Offer? by Apollo [ the post immediately below in blue is what I was answering. mine is below that]
If jesus took the offer, he would have been made into a god to the people of earth. They would worship him because he would represent the lawless one. He would have his followers do away with the law of the old testament, and bring a new one that focuses mostly on himself. He might even give the impression that you can now sin all you want as long as your focus and faith is on him. This of course would cause division between his followers and the followers of the true god. It would probably cause some wars. He would probably change the dates of worship from the sabbath to sunday as a mockery to the true god.

Oh man the more i think about it the more i see that if he had accepted that offer he would change the entire religios scene on earth.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 554016
[What he/she's saying above pretty much did happen though. Impemented by worshipers of Satan , who don't know they're followers of Satan?]

maybe you're right, somewhat, but I still think this fits better-

But that's why it was a temptation.
He would love to have begun his rule then and relieve the suffering of humans.
He ,probably tempted almost to the limit of what he could bear, resisted and though not knowing his father's timetable or reasons for delay, trusted his father would get it right
Certainly demonstrates the truth of 1 john 5:19, though , huh?


I forgot, wanted to add this scripture-
King James Bible Ps 110.1
The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

And then Satan cast out of heaven: "Woe to the earth and sea b/c the accuser of our brothers has come down to you, full of great anger ,knowing he has a short time"
Keep2theCode

User ID: 20545539
United States
10/12/2012 07:23 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
I [not that you asked] think the same thing I did back in August on Apollo's thread:...
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 554016
[What he/she's saying above pretty much did happen though. Impemented by worshipers of Satan , who don't know they're followers of Satan?]

maybe you're right, somewhat, but I still think this fits better-

But that's why it was a temptation.
He would love to have begun his rule then and relieve the suffering of humans.
He ,probably tempted almost to the limit of what he could bear, resisted and though not knowing his father's timetable or reasons for delay, trusted his father would get it right
Certainly demonstrates the truth of 1 john 5:19, though , huh?


I forgot, wanted to add this scripture-
King James Bible Ps 110.1
The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

And then Satan cast out of heaven: "Woe to the earth and sea b/c the accuser of our brothers has come down to you, full of great anger ,knowing he has a short time"
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10858311


I generally ignore Apollo, being an open illuminist and all. I see what he was inferring there: that what the NT teaches is what he personally thinks is the result of Jesus taking Satan's offer. He ignores completely what the OT was all about, pointing toward the Lamb of God and only after that, the Lion of Judah. He wants to have righteousness without sacrifice, and ritual without fulfillment. He wants to make the prophecies allegorized and so rob the Bible of one of its most important stamps of divine authorship.

What Satan was offering Jesus was the same shortcut, the same sidetrack off of the only path that could defeat him. Everything Satan tempted Jesus with was legitimate on the surface, but fatal in the long run.
Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? (Gal. 4:16)
X^24

User ID: 25455271
Northern Mariana Islands
10/12/2012 07:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
 Quoting: Keep2theCode

And these scriptures too, hopefully:
Is the soul the same as the spirit?
Eccl. 12:7: “Then the dust returns to the earth just as it happened to be and the spirit [or, life-force; Hebrew, ruach] itself returns to the true God who gave it.” (Notice that the Hebrew word for spirit is ruach; but the word translated soul is nephesh. The text does not mean that at death the spirit travels all the way to the personal presence of God; rather, any prospect for the person to live again rests with God. In similar usage, we may say that, if required payments are not made by the buyer of a piece of property, the property “returns” to its owner.) (KJ, AS, RS, NE, and Dy all here render ruach as “spirit.” NAB reads “life breath.”)

Eccl. 3:19: “There is an eventuality as respects the sons of mankind and an eventuality as respects the beast, and they have the same eventuality. As the one dies, so the other dies; and they all have but one spirit [Hebrew, ruach].” (Thus both mankind and beasts are shown to have the same ruach, or spirit. ]

Heb. 4:12: “The word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul [Greek, psy·khes; “life,” NE] and spirit [Greek, pneu;ma·tos], and of joints and their marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart.” (Observe that the Greek word for “spirit” is not the same as the word for “soul.”)

Does conscious life continue for a person after the spirit leaves the body?
Ps. 146:4: “His spirit [Hebrew, from ru;ach] goes out, he goes back to his ground; in that day his thoughts do perish.” (NAB, Ro, Yg, and Dy [145:4] here render ru;ach as “spirit.” Some translations say “breath.”)
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10858311


See if this answers your question?

Soul = Body + Spirit = Soul

The apostle Paul wrote, "Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us and we gave them reverence; shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits and live?" (Hebrews 12:9) Paul said that we should "be in subjection unto the Father of spirits." What "spirits" was Paul referring to that God is the Father of? The Bible tells us that when we die "then shall the dust (i.e., our body) return to the earth [from which it was made] as it was; and the spirit [of man] shall return unto God who gave it" (Ecclesiates 12:7).

In Genesis 2:7 we read, "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Man is composed of two parts. The part that we can see is our physical body which was made from the dust of the earth. The earth was not only created to be our home, but we, ourselves, are also part of the earth, and the earth is part of us (see Gen. 3:19). We and the earth share a common bond. We and the earth are joined together and are dependant upon one another. The earth provides life support for us and, in turn, we provide life support to the earth. What happens to one, affects the other.

But there is another part of man that gives life to his physical body. The Bible tells us that there is a spirit within man (Job 32:8) and that spirit comes from God. And when we die, our spirit "shall return unto God who gave it." According to the Bible, it is only when the physical body of man and the spirit of man come together that man becomes "a living soul." But if our spirit comes from God, and when we die it shall return back to God from where it came, that means our spirits originally were with God before they were united with our earthly body. That means, God is literally the Father of our spirits. And this is why the Bible states that we need to be in subjection to Him.

According to the Bible, it is only when the physical body of man and the spirit of man come together that man becomes "a living soul." But if our spirit ... - [link to www.14lds.com]

The article goes on to explain how heaven and earth are the same place, and has many insights into the truth of all things.
The deception continues to crumble.
Thread: Tips for improving the GLP experience.
Christ was mischaracterized to the point of Crucifixion.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 10858311
United States
10/12/2012 07:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
Agree with your last 2 paragraphs, except not that ransom had to be paid to Satan. I'll come back with more about that if anyone would like. Know mankind is technically "in slavery to sin and death",but not to Satan?, until ransomed. Satan is the hidden ruler of this world, but "is always transforming himself into an angel of light", so his non-benevolence is disguised. Maybe Adam was not deceived about the "sin and death" part, but was deceived about Satan's rulership, because he believed he was "now like God" and could rule himself without worrying what God thought about it, but didn't realize he'd really selected Satan to rule him and everyone to come. 1John 5:19
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10858311


A ransom cannot be paid to an idea or concept, but only to a real personal being. We can speak of metaphorical meanings, but Jesus' sacrifice was quite literal, so it follows that the payee was also quite literal. Since Satan did indeed own the world, and not merely sin or death, it seems to me that this is a reasonable conclusion.
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


Yes, I know what you mean. It IS reasonable and It's what I've thought sometimes must be right, no matter what anybody says. I know I've read that it's wrong though, and will try to find that, though it didn't totally convince me at the time. I DO know I've read recently that God paid some conquerers of his people a ransom when He released his ppl, but not [I think] Pharoah?-dead anyway- [because he'd had so many chances to see the light and "let my ppl go", and even only slightly paused after the death of his son and heir, before deciding to pursue them to the Red Sea, after all. And this could apply to Satan, to not deserve a ransom?]

Salt, I think this must prefigure how some will not acknowledge that God is stronger than them, no matter WHAT irrefutable evidence they are shown, and will die at Armageddon.
Keep2theCode

User ID: 20545539
United States
10/12/2012 07:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
Yes, I know what you mean. It IS reasonable and It's what I've thought sometimes must be right, no matter what anybody says. I know I've read that it's wrong though, and will try to find that, though it didn't totally convince me at the time. I DO know I've read recently that God paid some conquerers of his people a ransom when He released his ppl, but not [I think] Pharoah?-dead anyway- [because he'd had so many chances to see the light and "let my ppl go", and even only slightly paused after the death of his son and heir, before deciding to pursue them to the Red Sea, after all. And this could apply to Satan, to not deserve a ransom?]

Salt, I think this must prefigure how some will not acknowledge that God is stronger than them, no matter WHAT irrefutable evidence they are shown, and will die at Armageddon.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10858311


But Pharaoh did not own the Jews, because the Jews did nothing such as betray God or rebel against Him. What Satan did was technically "legal" but obtained through treachery.
Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? (Gal. 4:16)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 25445959
United States
10/12/2012 07:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
[link to www.jesus-is-savior.com]
Kabbala

Kabbalah an ancient form of Babylonian mysticism, which was formalized at the end of the 12th Century. Having turned Biblical truth and history into occult myths and suggestions. It has evolved through the centuries blending with gnosticism, theosophy and other occult mysteries usually behind closed doors and in secret societies.

Cabala comprises two aspects: theoretical Cabala and practical Cabala. The latter amounts, for all intents and purposes, to white magic, operating with the holy names of God in contrast to black magic, which uses demonic powers (witchcraft).

Theosophy & Kabbalah
The Hidden Agenda of the Kabbalah


The Kabbalah is based on a series of visions delivered to a person in a trance. To Christians that should be raising alarm bells. The Kabbalah is based on a series of books that are called the Zohar. This is usually published in 4 to 6 volumes. It claims to be a revelation from the God of the Old Testament. The implications are immense! According to those involved in the Kabbalah, the Zohar is essentially a commentary on the Old Testament. But it was written by people who are clearly Spiritualists: A Spiritualist is a person who consults the dead, and who consults familiar spirits. In other words, the Zohar, which is what the Kabbalah is based on, is actually a work of the Occult.

This is called "Automated Writing". This phenomena does not happen by itself. It is not a normal force of nature. It cannot happen--in fact--until a spiritual entity possesses the body of a human being, takes over their body, and begins to write through them. The Bible has a term for that: it is called "demonic possession"!

That is the true origin of the Zohar and the Kabbalah.

Those who translated the Kabbalah were Occult authors who were steeped in Demonic Worship and Demonic books - They were writing them!

1. Eliphas Levi

2. MacGregor Mathers

3. H.P. Blavatsky

4. A.E. Waite

These are the main authors of books about the Kabbalah.

Eliphas Levi is the author who led the Occult revival of the 1800s, that revived Satanism and Luciferianism. He wrote many books about ritual Black Magic and how to have contact with demonic spirits...because he was seeking them.

H.P. Blavatsky is the founder of Theosophy. This is the view that Lucifer is truly an angel of light and he is the one who deserves our worship and allegiance. Blavatsky came from an occult family, and was already a medium when she was a teenager. She sought out evil and the company of demonic spirits all of her life. She wrote many books about the occult. She believed that the Jews--through books like the Kabbalah--had stolen books of black magic that had previously come from the Chaldeans. She denied that Jesus was the Christ. She also denied that salvation could come through Jesus Christ. She remained extremely hostile to Jehovah/Yahweh.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/12/2012 08:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
i didn't see it if you did.
 Quoting: Salt


Well, I commented that Jesus' debate with Satan indicated that Satan had been given jurisdiction of the world, which is why IMHO he wanted people to sin. I'm not sure what else you wanted to know.
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


yeah, i saw that. but, after you said that, i introduced the idea that Jesus already owned all the kingdoms of the world. He is God. But, that for Jesus, the temptation was not in gaining Satan's kingdoms, but the possibility of avoiding the cross.

any thoughts on that?

Satan is prince of the air. But, more than that, i don't think he reigns over much.
Keep2theCode

User ID: 20545539
United States
10/12/2012 08:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
i didn't see it if you did.
 Quoting: Salt


Well, I commented that Jesus' debate with Satan indicated that Satan had been given jurisdiction of the world, which is why IMHO he wanted people to sin. I'm not sure what else you wanted to know.
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


yeah, i saw that. but, after you said that, i introduced the idea that Jesus already owned all the kingdoms of the world. He is God. But, that for Jesus, the temptation was not in gaining Satan's kingdoms, but the possibility of avoiding the cross.

any thoughts on that?

Satan is prince of the air. But, more than that, i don't think he reigns over much.
 Quoting: Salt


IMHO, Satan acquired the kingdoms of the world from God. Even in the NT he is referred to as "the prince of the power of the air" and "the god of this age". Jesus paid the price but as yet has not returned to claim his kingdom, giving us instead a "deposit guaranteeing our inheritance". This explains why the world is so bad and why judgment will finally come upon the whole world. So I do believe he was making a real offer to Jesus, a real temptation. Why would Satan say this to Jesus? I can't accept that he thought Jesus had forgotten what He already owned. As I said, certainly the whole episode in the wilderness was for the purpose of turning Jesus from the cross, but if that's all Satan wanted, why not just keep offering Jesus ease and comfort? Jesus was there for the expressed purpose of redemption, and there had to be a real personage to pay the price to.
Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? (Gal. 4:16)
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/12/2012 08:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either
i didn't see it if you did.
 Quoting: Salt


Well, I commented that Jesus' debate with Satan indicated that Satan had been given jurisdiction of the world, which is why IMHO he wanted people to sin. I'm not sure what else you wanted to know.
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


yeah, i saw that. but, after you said that, i introduced the idea that Jesus already owned all the kingdoms of the world. He is God. But, that for Jesus, the temptation was not in gaining Satan's kingdoms, but the possibility of avoiding the cross.

any thoughts on that?

Satan is prince of the air. But, more than that, i don't think he reigns over much.
 Quoting: Salt


IMHO, Satan acquired the kingdoms of the world from God. Even in the NT he is referred to as "the prince of the power of the air" and "the god of this age". Jesus paid the price but as yet has not returned to claim his kingdom, giving us instead a "deposit guaranteeing our inheritance". This explains why the world is so bad and why judgment will finally come upon the whole world. So I do believe he was making a real offer to Jesus, a real temptation. Why would Satan say this to Jesus? I can't accept that he thought Jesus had forgotten what He already owned. As I said, certainly the whole episode in the wilderness was for the purpose of turning Jesus from the cross, but if that's all Satan wanted, why not just keep offering Jesus ease and comfort? Jesus was there for the expressed purpose of redemption, and there had to be a real personage to pay the price to.
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


makes sense. thanks.
i didn't think Jesus forgot what He owned. I thought the translation was rough.

News








We're dropping truth bombs like it's the end of days!