Good News Of Great Joy. Oh?

[Webers_Home]

-
● Luke 2:8-12 . .And there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby,
keeping watch over their flocks at night. An angel of the Lord appeared to
them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified.

. . . But the angel said to them; "Don't be afraid. I bring you good news of
great joy that will be for all the people. Today, in the town of David, a savior
has been born to you; he is Messiah, the Lord."

Not every Christian denomination heralds a Xmas message that qualifies as
"good news of great joy". Several announce a version that is neither good
nor joyful at all; but is actually bad news indeed because their message--
although adequately announcing the reality of divine retribution --fails to tell
of a guaranteed fail-safe, sin-proof, human nature-proof, Ten
Commandments-proof, bad behavior-proof, apostasy-proof, reprobate-proof,
God-proof, Devil-proof rescue from the wrath of God. Roman Catholicism,
the very centerpiece and public image of Christianity, can't even guarantee
safety for its own Popes nor for its outstanding nuns.

Friday, April 8, 2005; millions of Catholics around the world-- including
Cardinals, Bishops, and Monsignors --prayed for Karol Wojtyla during his
funeral. Let me point out something that should go without saying: if
someone has already gone on to eternal life; is it really necessary to
continue praying for them? Of course not. They'd be home free. The millions
of Catholics left behind would be the ones in need of prayer; not Mr.
Wojtyla. But the sad reality is: no Catholic, not even a Pope, knows for sure
where they're going when they cross over to the other side.

If Popes and super duper nuns like Mother Teresa are in danger of missing
out on eternal life, then what "great joy" does news like Rome's gospel have
to offer John Q and Jane Doe pew warmer? None, no joy at all. The best
they can do is cross their fingers and pray for the best while in the backs of
their minds dreading the worst.

The angel announced the birth of a savior. Webster's defines a "savior" as
one who rescues. You've seen examples of rescuers-- lifeguards, firemen,
cops, emergency medical teams, Coast Guard units, snow patrols, and
mountain rescue teams. Rescuers typically save people who are facing
imminent death and/or grave danger and utterly helpless to do anything
about it.

Of what real benefit would the rescuer of Luke 2:8-12 really be to anybody if
he couldn't guarantee a fail-safe, sin-proof, human nature-proof, Ten
Commandments-proof, bad behavior-proof, apostasy-proof, reprobate-proof,
God-proof, Devil-proof rescue from the wrath of God? He'd be of no benefit
to anybody. No; he'd be an incompetent ninny that nobody could rely on.

But, if a rescuer were to be announced who guaranteed anybody who wants
it, a completely free of charge, no strings attached, guaranteed fail-safe, sin
proof, human nature-proof, Ten Commandments-proof, bad behavior-proof,
apostasy-proof, reprobate-proof, God-proof, Devil-proof rescue from the
wrath of God, and full-time protection from future retribution; wouldn't that
qualify as good news of great joy? I think just about everybody would have
to agree with me that news like that would not only most certainly be good;
but also cause for celebration, and for ecstatic happiness.

/

 

[bbyrd009]

So, you have now been rescued, yes? Meaning you are done being rescued, and you are not waiting for any other rescue.

 

[Webers_Home]

-

So, you have now been rescued, yes?

Regarding the lake of brimstone depicted at Rev 20:10-15; yes.

Meaning you are done being rescued, and you are not waiting for any other
rescue.

Regarding the lake of brimstone depicted at Rev 20:10-15; correct.

/

 

[Webers_Home]

-
I grew up a Catholic boy and attended catechism to the level of
Confirmation. I must not have been paying attention to the nuns who taught
the classes because for quite a few years I was under the impression that
Christ was a tragic victim of circumstances beyond his control and that his
crucifixion served no practical purpose except to make me pity the man.

I mean; every Sunday I looked around the church at the gloomy stations of
the cross hanging on the walls. How was I supposed to derive good news of
great joy from those? And it seems that every artistic representation of
Jesus' mom-- the statues and the paintings --depict her as blue, sorrowful,
forlorn and depressed. Not even so much as a lick of optimism.

The lack of cheer in Catholicism is prevalent at every turn: even the
communion service is a downer; and it really shouldn't be. According to John
6:54, Jesus' flesh and blood is supposed to endow people with eternal life. I
should think that would certainly make people happy, but no; it doesn't.
They all return to their seats looking as if they were just sentenced to ten
years in prison for bank robbery.

Well; you can imagine my delight, as well as my relief, to finally learn that
the purpose of Christ's death was to satisfy justice on my behalf in such a
way as to spare me the inconvenience of dying for my sins in the reservoir
of brimstone depicted at Rev 20:11-15 where people are on track to be
terminated by a mode of death akin to a foundry worker falling into a kettle
of molten iron.

According to Dan 12:2 and John 5:28-29, there is only one resurrection
allotted per person; which means that people sentenced to death in the lake
won't be coming back because they will have used up their one resurrection
to face justice at the Great White Throne event.

FYI: Though people will die in the lake, their remains won't be totally
incinerated but instead will be preserved as perpetual nourishment for a
curious species of fire-proof worm.

● Isa 66:22-24 . . All humanity will come to worship me from week to week
and from month to month. And as they go out, they will see the dead bodies
of those who have rebelled against me. For the worms that devour them will
never die, and the fire that burns them will never go out. All who pass by
will view them with utter loathing.

A worm that thrives in fire is pretty amazing, but not unreasonable. The 4
inch Pompeii worm lives in sea water temperatures of 176° Fahrenheit: hot
enough to kill salmonella and sanitize an egg. So I guess if God could create
a worm like the Pompeii, it shouldn't be too difficult for Him to create worms
that like it even warmer.

But then, the properties of fire are easily circumvented by the genius who
created them. For example: fire totally incinerated the cities of Sodom and
Gomorrah but left unscathed a desert shrub that Moses encountered in the
Sinai outback while tending his father-in law's sheep. (Ex 3:1-3)

Compare Dan 3:8-27 where a blistering hot fire didn't even so much as
singe the clothing of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego while slaying the
guards that threw them in the furnace.

Isa 66:22-24 suggests that the worms will never run out of something to
eat; which means that the human remains upon which they'll feed will never
be used up. How so?

There are incidents in the Bible where small amounts of foodstuffs were
miraculously extended. One example is 1Kgs 17:8-16 where a tiny bit of
flour and oil nourished Elijah and a widow woman, and her son, for a good
many days during a time of prolonged drought.

Another incident is at 2Kgs 4:1-7 where a certain widow's husband died and
left her deeply in debt. God extended her last pot of oil sufficiently to sell off
enough to retire her debts, thereby saving her two sons from slavery.

All those human remains floating around out there in the lake of brimstone
will likely resemble a ghastly cranberry bog at harvest time. That should be
quite a scene to behold.

/

 

[bbyrd009]

ok well i wouldn't hold my breath there, wadr.

 

[Webers_Home]

-
I was loyal to Rome and its doctrines until I was 24. But though I cast a vote
of confidence in Rome's doctrines, I was mostly lapsed and didn't practice
them.

My eldest brother went on to become a priest, and today he's a semi-retired
Friar who is no longer confident that a hell exists. I don't know why he feels
that way; we don't talk much about things like that.

But unlike my eldest brother, I have never even one single moment in my
entire 72+ years doubted the existence of hell and eternal suffering.
Ironically, it was my dread of that very thing that led me to part company
with Rome.

President Obama published a book in October of 2009 whose title includes
the words: The Audacity Of Hope.

The usual understanding of hope is something like crossing your fingers and
praying for the best while in the back of your mind dreading the worst. An
audacious hope is sort of like that. It's a hope against hope; viz: an
irrational pursuit of something out of reach on the slim chance you might get
lucky and actually attain it.

The apostle Peter's understanding of hope was very different.

● 1Pet 3:15 . . Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks
you for a reason for your hope.

The Greek word for "hope" in Peter's command is elpis (el pece') which
means to anticipate (usually with pleasure) and to expect with confidence.
Note the elements of anticipation, and expectation, and confidence.

In other words: Peter's hope wasn't audacious. No, he wasn't crossing his
fingers and praying for the best while in the back of his mind dreading the
worst and/or irrationally pursuing something out of reach on the slim chance
of attaining it. Not Peter, no, he looked forward to an excellent afterlife; and
he fully expected to get it; no problem.

So, unless someone knows for proof-positive, beyond even the slightest
glimmer of sensible doubt, that their afterlife future is safe and secure, then
of course it is impossible for them to comply with Peter's instructions seeing
as they would not yet have the kind of hope about which he wrote.

● Rom 12:12 . . Rejoicing in hope.

When people are praying for the best, while in the back of their mind
dreading the worst, they have absolutely no cause for rejoicing; no; but they
do have plenty of cause to fear the unknown.

Writing to his friends in Ephesus, the apostle Paul said:

"Remember that at one time you, Gentiles in the flesh, were without hope"

How many hopeless Gentiles are we talking about? Well, for starters; as of
2014, there were approximately 1.3 billion Roman Catholics worldwide. None
of them, not even the Pope, had the kind of hope that Peter had. In point of
fact, Catholics are not allowed to believe themselves to have heaven in the
bag.

Council of Trent Session 6, Chapter 16, Canon 16: If anyone says that he
will for certain, with an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift
of perseverance even to the end, unless he shall have learned this by a
special revelation, let him be anathema.

To top that off: according to the Catechism, CCC 1035, Catholics are just
inches from the worst, because should they leave this life with just one un
absolved mortal sin on the books, they go directly to Hell and eternal
suffering; no stop-over in a purgatory. No, their trip is a direct flight. Even if
they've been a faithful Catholic for 49 years, they will miss the boat just as if
they had been a Hindu, or a Muslim, or an atheist. All their years as a
faithful Catholic will be stricken from the record and count for naught.

I am pretty much forced to conclude from Peter's and Paul's writings about
elpis hope that Roman Catholicism is a religion very much like the one
described in Rev 3:14-22 where Christ is depicted standing outside a church
banging on the door trying to get someone's attention to let him in because
a church without elpis hope is a church without God.

● Eph 2:11-12 . .Remember that at one time you, Gentiles in the flesh, were
without hope and without God in the world.

/

 

[bbyrd009]

you might mention how Peter died, here, and put people in the frame of context a bit more, so that they don't get persuaded that they are even close to the same people Peter was addressing then.
Cuz wadr

So, unless someone knows for proof-positive, beyond even the slightest
glimmer of sensible doubt, that their afterlife future is safe and secure

is not Scriptural, and can be dismantled with any one of many, many Scriptures. This is being misinterpreted, with all due respect.

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Q: How did the apostles Paul and Peter obtain this elpis hope about which
you speak? Upon what did they base their confidence?

A: Their confidence was based upon trust; and actually, so is mine. Let me
explain.

I have no truck with the Watchtower Society, but there is one area of their
belief system where they and I are in total agreement: Jesus is not a failure.
In other words: Jesus was, and he still is, a faithful and reliable servant in all
with which God has assigned him.

● John 5:30 . . I do not seek my own will but the will of the One who sent
me.

● John 6:38 . . For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but
the will of Him that sent me.

● John 8:29 . .The one who sent me is with me. He has not left me alone,
because I always do what is pleasing to him.

Now with that, here is one of Jesus' assignments with which I have the
utmost in confidence that he will not fail.

● John 6:39 . . This is the will of the One who sent me, that I should not lose
anything of what He gave me

Were Jesus to lose even just one head of the sheep that his Father gave
him; he would fail to satisfy the will of the One who sent him.

FYI: Sheep don't just wander into Jesus' fold. No; God rounds them up and
drives them to His son for safe keeping.

● John 6:44 . . No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draw
him

● John 6:37 . . Everything that the Father gives me will come to me, and I
will not reject anyone who comes to me,

The major difficulty thwarting the anti-OSAS crowd is their inability to trust
God's son. It's really just that simple; and their inability to trust him clouds
their judgment to the point that they actually end up insinuating that God's
son is not the good shepherd he claims to be. In their minds eye, he is an
incompetent slacker whose shepherding skills could use some improvement.

Q: Why is it that so many people identifying themselves as Christians are
unable to rely upon Christ's competence as a shepherd?

A: Because they are not his sheep.

● John 10:26 . . You do not believe, because you are not among my sheep.

You see; in order to get into Jesus' sheepfold, it is absolutely essential to
believe in him. It's the one prerequisite that can't be waived. I don't mean
just to believe the things you hear about him and/or that you read about
him, but to believe in him as a reliable person.

This is similar to what intelligent people do at election time. They cast their
vote for the candidate that they most believe in. Not everyone votes like
that of course. The dummies often vote for candidates merely on the basis
of their gender and/or the color of their skin regardless of their
trustworthiness and/or the quality of their executive abilities.

People unable to believe in Jesus' shepherding competence are of course not
his sheep-- quite the contrary; they're slated for the lake of brimstone
depicted at Rev 20:10-15 where, along with the anti-OSAS zealots, they will
be summarily terminated via a mode of death akin to a foundry worker
falling into a kettle of molten iron.

● John 3:18 . .Whoever believes in him will not be condemned, but whoever
does not believe has already been condemned,

/

 

[bbyrd009]

-
I was loyal to Rome and its doctrines until I was 24. But though I cast a vote
of confidence in Rome's doctrines, I was mostly lapsed and didn't practice
them.

My eldest brother went on to become a priest, and today he's a semi-retired
Friar who is no longer confident that a hell exists. I don't know why he feels
that way; we don't talk much about things like that.

But unlike my eldest brother, I have never even one single moment in my
entire 72+ years doubted the existence of hell and eternal suffering.
Ironically, it was my dread of that very thing that led me to part company
with Rome.

interesting; i have come to hold your brother's view, being as how hell cannot be found before Latin translations of the Bible existed, and the exegesis of the Greek plainly outlines where the concept started from, although it takes a little mixing in of some further mythological, Norse gods, used in translation, to fully develop it. A Jewish scholar could prolly present the position better than i could, though.

 

[bbyrd009]

You realize that every one of our references to hell are in the NT?
http://biblehub.net/search.php?q=hell

and although Strong's is basically useless here, we can still extract some information, on "hell;"

"the valley of lamentation"

הִנֹּם is the name of a man

which was so called from the cries of the little children who were thrown into the fiery arms of Moloch (which see), i. e. of an idol having the form of a bull. The Jews so abhorred the place after these horrible sacrifices had been abolished by king Josiah (2 Kings 23:10), that they cast into it not only all manner of refuse, but even the dead bodies of animals and of unburied criminals who had been executed. And since fires were always needed to consume the dead bodies, that the air might not become tainted by the putrefaction, it came to pass that the place was called γηννα τοῦ πυρός (this common explanation of the descriptive genitive τοῦπυρός is found in Rabbi David Kimchi (fl. circa A.D. 1200) on Psalm 27:13. Some suppose the genitive to refer not to purifying fires {from God} but to the fires of Moloch {who does not exist, except on earth}; others regard it as the natural symbol of penalty...and then this name was transferred to that place... (see "f. name to be changed to הֲמוֺןגּֿוֺג ׳ג Ezekiel 39:11,15. Most frequently" @ "gay," below)

from the root;
gay http://biblehub.com/hebrew/1516.htm(see gevah http://biblehub.com/hebrew/1466.htm"confidence, pride," {"pride goes before a fall"})
Hinnom http://biblehub.com/hebrew/2011.htm

So, Valley of Hinnom, right here on eretz,
according to Sim Bö Gf and others = wailing, Arabic

from cries of children
where incense was burned, and children were offered in sacrifice to 'Molech.'
always with reference to the sacrifice of children by fire
on account of this inhuman & idolatrous practice it was abhorred by priest & prophet, & defiled by Josiah
Hinnom
Probably of foreign origin

So, what do we have? A place in Israel where parents used to sacrifice their children to Molech, a horrible place, on earth, all the refs overwhelmingly referring to earth, with several overtones of name-changing, probably foreign origination, note Hades is a Greek mythological god, etc.

So, what does our current, new conception of "hell" do for us?
It removes punishment for pride and overconfidence to some future place, to be feared, unless certain Christian Laws are followed, explicitly;
it allows that satan has fire, when God is the All~Consuming fire, and satan couldn't light a match.
It allows the foundation to be re-laid, over and over, sin and death, death and sin, repentance and oh ya, redemption, too, i guess; but, sin, and death, after all; and repentance; these are the topics, of most "Christian" conversations, and sermons, over and over.

The focus is kept on sin, because after all hell, which is not even considered to be "trials and tribulations," today, and can't possibly mean
"if you are a selfish jerk to people, you are going to be gnashing your teeth when you need a support system, and you don't have one."

 

[bbyrd009]

and, as might be obvious to some, our conception of "sin" is equally whack--even if the exegesis is much easier--and of course "death" to us does not mean what God means, either, which is a bit more accepted, being as how we are all about applying death as broadly as possible lol.


and understand that i am not saying that there are not future consequences for today's actions; you will reap what you sow. Which can also be applied to "if you are recruiting people for Jesus out of a fear of hell, someday, you are going to reap what you sow," too. peace.

 

[Webers_Home]

-
● Matt 19:16-17 . . Now someone approached him and said: Teacher, what
good must I do to gain eternal life? He answered him: If you wish to enter
into life, keep the commandments.

That was a valid answer; and were someone to actually keep the
commandments, they'd be rewarded as Jesus said. But the catch is: one's
obedience has to be consistent. In other words: they can't get by on keeping
the commandments some of the time, nor even most of the time; no, it's all
the time or no time at all. God is not pleased with half-baked obedience.
Failure to obey the commandments at any time results in death rather than
life.

● Ezek 18:20 . .The one who sins shall die.

● Rom 6:23 . . For the wages of sin is death

● Rom 2:6-13 . . God will render to every man according to his deeds: to
them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and
immortality, eternal life. But unto them that are contentious, and do not
obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath.

. . .Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the
Jew first, and also of the Gentile; but glory, honor, and peace, to every man
that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: for there is no
respect of persons with God.

. . . For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law:
and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law. For not
the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be
justified.

Well; if you were to ask me; there's neither good news nor joy to be had in
that message; it sets the bar pretty high; but it gets worse.

● Matt 5:20 . . I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of
the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the
kingdom of heaven.

Actually, the Pharisees were very pious and very proficient at keeping the
commandments. For example the apostle Paul. He was a Pharisee; and a
really top-notch one at that.

● Phil 3:6 . . As to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless.

But the problem associated with the Pharisees is that their kind of
righteousness is a personal righteousness; which-- even as superior as
theirs was --is still not good enough to obtain salvation.

● Rom 10:1-3 . . Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God on their
behalf is for salvation. I testify with regard to them that they have zeal for
God, but it is not discerning. For, in their unawareness of the righteousness
that comes from God and their attempt to establish their own
[righteousness], they did not submit to the righteousness of God.

The righteousness of God is humanly impossible to duplicate, which is why
it's an imputed righteousness rather than a righteousness produced by
effort. In other words: the righteousness of God is an endowment; viz: it's a
gift free of charge with no strings attached.

● Rom 3:22 . . The righteousness of God is through faith in Jesus Christ for
all who believe. For there is no distinction; all have sinned and are deprived
of the glory of God. They are justified freely by His grace through the
redemption in Christ Jesus.

● Rom 3:9 . .And be found in him, not having any righteousness of my own
based on the Commandments,. but that which comes through faith in Christ;
the righteousness from God.

● 2Cor 5:21 . . For our sake He made him to be sin who did not know sin, so
that we might become the righteousness of God in him.

Now, with all that under our belts, it's very easy to see that some people's
interpretation of Php 2:12 is in error because nobody, not even Popes and/or
super duper nuns like Mother Teresa, no matter how devoted, nor how hard
nor how long they work at it, will ever succeed at producing a level of
righteousness equal to the righteousness of God because they're only human
while He's divine.

/

 

[epostle1]

Still making false statements about the Catholic Church, eh Weber? Still mugging an old lady?
We have no pretense about attaining the righteousness of God or salvation by works. Have you ever heard of persevering to the end?
Calvin was wrong when he invented OSAS, and so are you.

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Writing to his friends in Colossi; Paul said:

"For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God." (Col 3:3)

The Greek word for "hidden" is krupto (kroop'-to) which means to conceal
(properly, by covering)

"you have died" catches my attention more so than krupto because it
indicates that the Bible's version of Christianity is a lethal religion. It quite
literally, in some mysterious way that I don't quite understand; made
Christ's believing followers participants in his crucifixion rather than merely
observers..

● Rom 6:3 . . Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into
Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?

● Rom 6:6 . . Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him

● Gal 2:20 . . I am crucified with Christ

● Col 3:3 . . For you died when Christ died

In other words; in lieu of facing justice at the Great White Throne event
depicted at Rev 20:11-15, God has given people the option of facing it on
the cross with Christ.

Q: How might somebody obtain this option about which you speak?

A: Easy. Just find yourself a private moment and pray something like this:

"God: I'm a sinner. I would like to take advantage of your son's death."

If perchance somebody out there in cyberspace is feeling a tug within
themselves to pray like that, don't stifle it because there's no telling if
nd/or when you'll ever feel that tug again.

/