Topic: What happens to the wicked upon death? - page 7. (Read 6598 times)

Why do you post about something someone wrote who was born about 400 years after ? Would that be Herod Agrippa, or Herod Antipas.... or would YOU even know the difference?
Regardless... No Herod in RECORDED HISTORY ever ordered murdering children ( other than His own!)

Born of a virgin in a stable/cave on the winter solstice (visited by Noblemen bearing gifts) ;  died/crucified on a cross on the Spring Equinox; baptized in water; 12 disciples; healed the sick/made blind men see; ascended into Heaven and promised to return someday.....

Straight out of pagan mythology.

Take another look....

Mary and Joseph took Jesus and fled Herod's' "Massacre of the Innocents" ( murdering all male children under 2 years old).

That event never happened. Something like that certainly would not have escaped the historians' attention.

Was your Jesus a "fairy tale"?

You'd be hard-pressed to prove he wasn't.

It has been recorded that Herod did things we would consider unbelievable: The non-Christian writer is Macrobius (A.D. 395-423). Here is his comment,

When he [emperor Augustus] heard that among the boys in Syria under two years old whom Herod, king of the Jews, had ordered to kill, his own son was also killed, he said: it is better to be Herod's pig, than his son."

but i'm sure your right that some things in the Bible wouldn't show up in secular writings. If you wish to make that absolute truth that it never happened that's your option

You don't need to take my word for it. There are many reliable historical accounts of the period, and none of them even mention Jesus, much less anything else mentioned in the Gospel accounts.
There are reliable historical accounts of paganism, and everything mentioned in the gospels is also attributed to pagan god/men.... Virgin birth; followers/disciples; miracles/healing; death on a cross; resurrection/ascension into heaven.... every single thing you believe Jesus did was done by pagan god/men that preceded Jesus.

Convince yourself that you are not worshipping the "new& improved" pagan myth if you need to.

Save me a spot too,i'll come with the french fries and some beers.

I'm blind because someone points out what they think is a contradiction and i'm suppose to throw my hands up and dismiss everything? Jesus was talking directly to the 11 Apostles when He said that, so it was so with those they came in contact with, and believed, that's not possible? Beyond that i would have to see all Scripture in one context, so there may be a better answer i haven't come across yet, that doesn't mean i take your view as the whole thing being fairytale

Why do you insist on making yourself blind, Sana8410?
The scripture is clear, and is not taken out of context. And why aren't you dicing these words......

Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved....... 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: ....?

Just like a religiously brainwashed fool.... First, Seeing things that aren't there, and then not seeing things as clear as the nose on your face when it's convenient for you.

You're not fooling anyone but yourself.

The lake of fire is metaphorically like a cauldron for melting iron in a steel mill. It's designed to "melt" the eternal soul into its component parts, thereby taking the impurities out, and returning the pure "energy" that God put into the universe, back to Him. Because the soul is eternal, it will take an eternity of "melting and purifying" to get God His basic "energy" back. God can do this because He works outside of eternity as well as within it, all of it in ways we probably will never understand.

Look at the Gospels in the Bible and see how many times Jesus talks about the fire that burns up the evil people. If you want to see what the lake of fire really is, combine everything you know from scripture about Jesus, and focus it all in the words in Luke 12:49,50. It might take a little thinking, but all of you should be able to figure it out - what the lake of fire really is.

18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all;

In earlier versions the word serpents are used here, and its parabolic language as described here

Psalm 140:1-4

1Deliver me, O LORD, from the evil man: preserve me from the violent man;

2Which imagine mischiefs in their heart; continually are they gathered together for war.

3They have sharpened their tongues like a serpent; adders' poison is under their lips.

4Keep me, O LORD, from the hands of the wicked; preserve me from the violent man; who have purposed to overthrow my goings.

So here serpents and poison (and other verses) are not actual serpents and poison but are what describe the wicked. So your verse can be seen in that light. There's another verse where Jesus calls a people a generation of vipers

they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”

The sick is also looked at 2 ways

Luke5 30;32 But their scribes and Pharisees murmured against his disciples, saying, Why do ye eat and drink with publicans and sinners?

31And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick.

32 I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance

Here being sick is being a sinner, which Jesus came to heal, which is Sin. It could give a clue also to how He heals even today, but you do point out a contradiction i can't fully address, just as i don't have every answer

BBQ pork and large juicy steaks cooked at the Lake of Fire?
Perhaps you die and are completely gone?

I'm not trying to be like anyone but me, i hope. Jesus was addressing the apostles, but i can see a contradiction if its meant to mean we should be seeing the same things today happening, but i can address some of the language.

However, given the greater context of the rest of Scripture, Sana8410 is correct.  There are other examples in the Bible like that, and in general usage also.

I get hired for a job, and told simply that I will be working from 8 to 5, that does not mean the hours can never change - or that they will change.

Then what background do you have that has caused you to abandon common sense and reason?  Outside of a mother's love for her children, there is nothing else in life that requires you to have blind faith without proof.

That is true either way - so, just as Sana8410 cannot definitely say from the passage alone that it was just for that, so you cannot definitely say from the passage alone that it was meant for all time.  There is no expiration date in the passage, but there is no mention of it being for all time either.

Jesus does not say in the passage that these signs will follow till the year 95 for example.
But, also, Jesus does not say that these signs will always follow for ever and ever.

No soap. Notice there are no caveats, conditions, disclaimers, or expiration dates on the above scripture.  Taking the typical Christian cop-out and claiming the Bible says one thing, but means something else, is just insulting the intelligence of anyone who can read it for what it says.

Rigon,i said no one is commissioned to offer the proof you are looking for. Its true in those days the Apostles had such power, but no one is doing that today, if they were even you would believe. I also do not have a religious background or remember anything taught in sunday school

15 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”

Mark 16:15-18

Not only did Jesus commission his followers, he offered "signs".
What's the matter, Sana8410, were sick that day they taught that in Sunday School?

But, since those signs donot follow you ( or anyone ) it's no wonder you choose to forget that part.

I'm not asking anything of you either, and no one can convert anyone, and no one is commissioned to offer the kind of proof you seek

John 20;29 Jesus said to him, Zolace, because you have seen me, you have believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

John 6;44 No man can come to me, except the Father who has sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

So all the preaching in the world by any human can't convert anyone, its only a vehicle

Check out Who the Angel of the Lord is in the O.T.  Many Bible scholars believe that He is Jesus before He was born of Mary. If there is no angel name (like Gabriel), and the text says the rather than an Angel of the Lord, the angel described has the attributes of God, Himself.

The book of Zechariah in the O.T. seems to have the best description of the Angel of the Lord. In it, the Angel is more than the other angels and creatures of God, yet the Angel is less than God Himself. This is similar to what Jesus is outside of the time that He spends as a man walking the earth.

This agrees with 1 Corinthians 15:27,28 where it says, "27 For he 'has put everything under his feet.' Now when it says that 'everything' has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28 When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all."

Hebrews explains that the angels are winds and flames of fire, not beings with the attributes of God.

Who made that stupid rule?
I'm not asking anyone to believe in my version of "god". I have nothing to prove.
You, and other Christians like you, are commissioned to convert people to your belief system. That's rather difficult when you can't present any evidence of your "god", isn't it.

I'm not a brainwashed religious fool. I know when things do or do not exist.

Too bad you can't say the same.