Just for heck of it.
- Thread starter crossnote
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Dont espouse half truths mr willie. Osteen has said himself that he doesnt talk about sin and repentance. He doesnt do so because he likes to focus on the exaltation of MAN and not Christ. He is a new age prosperity wolve in sheeps clothing. Dont derail crossnotes thread. Im done
Dont espouse half truths mr willie. Osteen has said himself that he doesnt talk about sin and repentance. He doesnt do so because he likes to focus on the exaltation of MAN and not Christ. He is a new age prosperity wolve in sheeps clothing. Dont derail crossnotes thread. Im done
If you had let it go with... Osteen has said himself that he doesnt talk about sin and repentance., you would have been telling the truth, and no one could dispute you. But, in your desire to hurl insults, you always seem to step over into unfounded fabrications, and you end up with blowing your credibility with a string of lies.
Good day Crossnote,
Forgive me for not getting on topic, but I don't even know how the word "Hell" got into the NT. It is not a transliteration of a Hebrew word, Hell is not a Greek word, Hell is not a Latin word. Hell is an English word from the Saxon’s (Germanic Peoples) that literally means to cover, or hide: paralleling the word grave.
There are three words translated as Hell in the NT:
Tartarus/Tartaroo - This word is used once in 2 Pet.2:4 regarding the angels who sinned, most likely speaking of that group who took wives from the progeny of men and as a result had giants as their offspring. And even though the word Tartarus is not used, I believe that Jude 6 is also referring to these same angels and their being kept in darkness (Tartarus)with everlasting chains.
Hades/Sheol - The meaning of the word is properly, the "unseen place," referring to the (invisible) realm in which the unrighteous e dead reside, i.e. the present dwelling place of all the departed (deceased). This is the same place that the spirit of the rich man of Luke 16:19 went after he died finding himself in torment in flame. According to Jesus, the realm of Hades is a place under the earth, "And you Capernaum, will you be lifted up to heaven? No, you will be brought down to Hades."
Geenna - géenna (a transliteration of the Hebrew term, Gêhinnōm, "the valley of Hinnom") – Gehenna, erroneously translated as hell (also referred to as the "lake of fire" in Revelation).
So to recap, Hades is the realm where the spirits of the unrighteous dead go after the death of the body, which is within the earth and Geenna refers to the place of final punishment post great white throne judgment, also referred to as the lake of fire and the second death in the book of Revelation. But as previously stated, I don't know why or how the word "Hell" got into the NT since as stated, it is not a transliteration of either Hebrew, Greek or Latin.
If I was to retranslate scripture, everywhere that the word Hades and Geenna appeared, those are the words that I would use in order to differentiate between Hades and the lake of fire. I would also never translate the word Hades or Sheol as "Grave" as some of the translations do.
Forgive me for not getting on topic, but I don't even know how the word "Hell" got into the NT. It is not a transliteration of a Hebrew word, Hell is not a Greek word, Hell is not a Latin word. Hell is an English word from the Saxon’s (Germanic Peoples) that literally means to cover, or hide: paralleling the word grave.
There are three words translated as Hell in the NT:
Tartarus/Tartaroo - This word is used once in 2 Pet.2:4 regarding the angels who sinned, most likely speaking of that group who took wives from the progeny of men and as a result had giants as their offspring. And even though the word Tartarus is not used, I believe that Jude 6 is also referring to these same angels and their being kept in darkness (Tartarus)with everlasting chains.
Hades/Sheol - The meaning of the word is properly, the "unseen place," referring to the (invisible) realm in which the unrighteous e dead reside, i.e. the present dwelling place of all the departed (deceased). This is the same place that the spirit of the rich man of Luke 16:19 went after he died finding himself in torment in flame. According to Jesus, the realm of Hades is a place under the earth, "And you Capernaum, will you be lifted up to heaven? No, you will be brought down to Hades."
Geenna - géenna (a transliteration of the Hebrew term, Gêhinnōm, "the valley of Hinnom") – Gehenna, erroneously translated as hell (also referred to as the "lake of fire" in Revelation).
So to recap, Hades is the realm where the spirits of the unrighteous dead go after the death of the body, which is within the earth and Geenna refers to the place of final punishment post great white throne judgment, also referred to as the lake of fire and the second death in the book of Revelation. But as previously stated, I don't know why or how the word "Hell" got into the NT since as stated, it is not a transliteration of either Hebrew, Greek or Latin.
If I was to retranslate scripture, everywhere that the word Hades and Geenna appeared, those are the words that I would use in order to differentiate between Hades and the lake of fire. I would also never translate the word Hades or Sheol as "Grave" as some of the translations do.
Getting back to the OP and subsequent posts, I have never used that line about Jesus talking about hell more than heaven, because I want to personally document the sources. Then maybe actually form some conclusions about this issue.
As for people who believe we should preach hell first, Ray Comfort comes to mind. I have seen videos of him attacking people by proving since they aren't following the Ten Commandments they are going to hell. I personally have always read in Scripture thatr we are not going to be with Jesus if we are not following Jesus. Anything else is just works!
As for Osteen, his Biblical mistakes have totally ruled him out as a valid preacher. I mean, who writes a sermon without checking out to see what it actually says in the Bible? And he does follow the positive confession heresy, probably because of his lack of knowledge of the Bible.
Our pastor's father came from England to preach when our pastor was ordained. He was a Baptist preacher from way back. And he knew the Bible inside out and backwards from memory, including long passages. It was a magnificent sermon, totally Biblical, from someone who had spent his life digging deep into the Word, loving God and being led by the Holy Spirit.
As for people who believe we should preach hell first, Ray Comfort comes to mind. I have seen videos of him attacking people by proving since they aren't following the Ten Commandments they are going to hell. I personally have always read in Scripture thatr we are not going to be with Jesus if we are not following Jesus. Anything else is just works!
As for Osteen, his Biblical mistakes have totally ruled him out as a valid preacher. I mean, who writes a sermon without checking out to see what it actually says in the Bible? And he does follow the positive confession heresy, probably because of his lack of knowledge of the Bible.
Our pastor's father came from England to preach when our pastor was ordained. He was a Baptist preacher from way back. And he knew the Bible inside out and backwards from memory, including long passages. It was a magnificent sermon, totally Biblical, from someone who had spent his life digging deep into the Word, loving God and being led by the Holy Spirit.
I don't think we should ever preach hell first. If we teach/preach the Gospel of Christ, and follow His example of teaching/preaching, all things will work for His Glory in my opinion.
I don't think the teaching/preaching of hell should be the focal point of any ministry.........but it should not be ignored/denied/avoided either. Just saying..........
Even John 3:16 has a clear reference to the destiny of the lost............"that whosoever believeth in Him should not PERISH but have everlasting life......." And if you read on it expands on this truth.
18 .) He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 .) And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 .) For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
Just teach/preach the Gospel of Christ..............well, in my opinion anyway.
I don't think the teaching/preaching of hell should be the focal point of any ministry.........but it should not be ignored/denied/avoided either. Just saying..........
Even John 3:16 has a clear reference to the destiny of the lost............"that whosoever believeth in Him should not PERISH but have everlasting life......." And if you read on it expands on this truth.
18 .) He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 .) And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 .) For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
Just teach/preach the Gospel of Christ..............well, in my opinion anyway.
I agree with almost everything youve said here. But I must disagree about Pat Comfort. I have never seen a video of him attacking anyone and I have watched just about everyone there is on him street preaching. His approach is a soft approach showing people their need for a savior because we have all fallen short and broken the 10 commandments. He preaches grace AND the law. He uses the going to court analogy with God being the judge and Jesus the payment.
Id be interested in seeing the videos you are speaking of if you can find them
I agree with almost everything youve said here. But I must disagree about Pat Comfort. I have never seen a video of him attacking anyone and I have watched just about everyone there is on him street preaching. His approach is a soft approach showing people their need for a savior because we have all fallen short and broken the 10 commandments. He preaches grace AND the law. He uses the going to court analogy with God being the judge and Jesus the payment.
Id be interested in seeing the videos you are speaking of if you can find them
I have watched numerous videos of him street evangelizing, because someone told me it was very effective. I was not impressed. Plus, what kind of follow through was done with those who did get pressured into "accepting" Christ? Certainly it was not mentioned in the videos!
And that is Ray Comfort, by the way!
Ugh! Pay Comfort! I knew that ! I know his name obviously!! It was a typo. Thank you for pointing it out to me
I still disagree with you. He does not blindside anyone. He has to ask them if he can video the conversation and they always say yes. Why do they say yes? Because his approach is gentle and loving. He does not pressure anyone. He does move through it rather fast but they understand and Ive not seen ONE who were left behind with questions. He explains what they need to know. It is not his approach that dumbfounds them but it is THE WORD. The word cuts like a double edged sword. He gives them plenty to think about. He actually asks them if they will strongly consider what was discussed and not to wait! He injects urgency in their need to be saved because none of us know when we will die.
He encourages them to read the Bible. I havent really seen many come to Christ right on camera. He plants seed. Isnt that what we are supposed to do? How many total strangers do YOU follow up with after you have told them about Christ? I cant even remember all those whom have heard the gospel from me when Im out and about.
It is an outright falsehood to say he makes the gospel about us! He makes it about Christ and what/why Christ did to pay our sin debt. He thoroughly explains the gospel.
Its okay that you were not impressed. But what you are claiming is not true! It is merely your quick assessment and an unfair one at that.
Quite frankly, your false position stating you have the right to teach doctrine to men doesnt impress me!
But I wont hold it against you.
I still disagree with you. He does not blindside anyone. He has to ask them if he can video the conversation and they always say yes. Why do they say yes? Because his approach is gentle and loving. He does not pressure anyone. He does move through it rather fast but they understand and Ive not seen ONE who were left behind with questions. He explains what they need to know. It is not his approach that dumbfounds them but it is THE WORD. The word cuts like a double edged sword. He gives them plenty to think about. He actually asks them if they will strongly consider what was discussed and not to wait! He injects urgency in their need to be saved because none of us know when we will die.
He encourages them to read the Bible. I havent really seen many come to Christ right on camera. He plants seed. Isnt that what we are supposed to do? How many total strangers do YOU follow up with after you have told them about Christ? I cant even remember all those whom have heard the gospel from me when Im out and about.
It is an outright falsehood to say he makes the gospel about us! He makes it about Christ and what/why Christ did to pay our sin debt. He thoroughly explains the gospel.
Its okay that you were not impressed. But what you are claiming is not true! It is merely your quick assessment and an unfair one at that.
Quite frankly, your false position stating you have the right to teach doctrine to men doesnt impress me!
But I wont hold it against you.
This topic is interesting. Looking back, when the Old Testament talked about hell, it was referring to sheol, which is not the place of eternal torment that Christians view hell as today. Sheol, a Jewish term, simply refered to the place of the dead in general, not particularly the place of punishment for the wicked. In fact, everyone who died went to sheol. Now, sheol was believed to be divided into two compartments, one for the righteous dead and one for the wicked dead, separated by a chasm. This is actually the setting for Jesus' controversial parable of the rich man and lazarus. People confuse this parable with the Christian vision of hell, but this parable is actually taking place in sheol.
Now, when Christ died, scholars believe this created a shift in the afterlife dwelling of our souls. Those on the "good" side of sheol were ministered to by Christ himself and ushered up to heaven. Those on the bad side stayed where they are. Now when people die as Christians, they no longer go to the good side of sheol but rather go to heaven, while those who are not in Christ still go to the bad side.
Of course, some people believe that we don't go anywhere, but upon death get ushered into the final judgment where Christ goes through the Book of Life and says who's in and who's out. That doesn't seem to jive with a lot of Scripture though, as there would be no people in sheol, heaven, or hell right now if that's the case.
This, at least, is the thought process I understood it as.
Now, when Christ died, scholars believe this created a shift in the afterlife dwelling of our souls. Those on the "good" side of sheol were ministered to by Christ himself and ushered up to heaven. Those on the bad side stayed where they are. Now when people die as Christians, they no longer go to the good side of sheol but rather go to heaven, while those who are not in Christ still go to the bad side.
Of course, some people believe that we don't go anywhere, but upon death get ushered into the final judgment where Christ goes through the Book of Life and says who's in and who's out. That doesn't seem to jive with a lot of Scripture though, as there would be no people in sheol, heaven, or hell right now if that's the case.
This, at least, is the thought process I understood it as.
what do you think, could it have had something to do with this advice?
Paul also tells us to be gentle as we exhort each other in the faith, and maybe that is what's reflected here.
the point is also to be made, that whenever in the epistles & in acts mention is made of 'salvation' it is salvation from something, and 'condemnation' implies damnation. verses like Jude 1:13 and 2 Peter 2:17 may not specifically mention hell, but they sure allude to it.
maybe an even greater point is made here --
even while Jude is preaching doom to certain others, he says "Mercy, peace and love be yours in abundance" to those who believe (verse 2), and makes this comment about even the angels not daring to condemn.
Christ Himself has all judgement -- is that what's reflected, too, maybe?
we haven't been given a spirit of fear, but adoption. we don't exactly have records of what the apostles said directly to those who openly despised the gospel; instead, we have letters written to encourage and instruct believers. i imagine ((from snippets like Galatians 5:12 !)) that the tone of those conversations might have been different. . .
just my thoughts.
interesting observation, crossnote.
Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable--if anything is excellent or praiseworthy -- think about such things.
(Philippians 4:8)
(Philippians 4:8)
Paul also tells us to be gentle as we exhort each other in the faith, and maybe that is what's reflected here.
the point is also to be made, that whenever in the epistles & in acts mention is made of 'salvation' it is salvation from something, and 'condemnation' implies damnation. verses like Jude 1:13 and 2 Peter 2:17 may not specifically mention hell, but they sure allude to it.
maybe an even greater point is made here --
But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not himself dare to condemn him for slander but said, "The Lord rebuke you!"
(Jude 1:9)
(Jude 1:9)
even while Jude is preaching doom to certain others, he says "Mercy, peace and love be yours in abundance" to those who believe (verse 2), and makes this comment about even the angels not daring to condemn.
Christ Himself has all judgement -- is that what's reflected, too, maybe?
we haven't been given a spirit of fear, but adoption. we don't exactly have records of what the apostles said directly to those who openly despised the gospel; instead, we have letters written to encourage and instruct believers. i imagine ((from snippets like Galatians 5:12 !)) that the tone of those conversations might have been different. . .
just my thoughts.
interesting observation, crossnote.