Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Ask God -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Emile Vidrine who wrote (37959)	7/10/2004 12:55:42 PM
From: Stan	Respond to of 39621

I was actually thinking about that verse concerning Judas and its implication concerning universalism.

To: Emile Vidrine who wrote (37959)	7/10/2004 11:40:40 PM
From: Berry Picker	Respond to of 39621

Excellent post Emile - It is funny to think that their are vessels honor and vessels of dishonor and yet both will eventually see the eternal gift of life - It makes no sense to say Judas would be better off never born - if even the vessels of dishonor go to heaven - there are may vessels of dishonor Pharoah was only one - Judas but one other. They are still better to have been born and literally go through the lake of fire if they indeed can eventually expect eternal life. Jesus stating the Judas would have been better never to have existed proves to me that universalism is indeed gross error. Good post.

To: Emile Vidrine who wrote (37959)	7/11/2004 1:26:01 AM
From: alan w	Respond to of 39621

AE Knoch was a man. He was not without error. His translation is however a vast improvement over the authorized versions. I have debated Don Hewey by e-mail. While he is a super nice guy, he traces all of our problems to man's absolute free will. 2 Peter 2:10 is his trademark verse. He is also a man, prone to err, as we all are. No man has a lock on truth. The fact of the matter is, in Mark 14:21, the greek is rather vague, and there was no punctuation. Sort of like the verse where Jesus tells the thief, "I tell you truly today you will be with me in paradise". ?? Did you miss this? Emile, here, learn something about God's plan of the eons. Note: feel free to insert age or ages for eon or eons. There was a time before God made any eons (I Cor. 2:7). Then God made the eons (Heb. 1:2). There were eons in the past (Col 1:26). We are living in this present wicked eon (Gal. 1:4). Satan is the god of this eon (II Cor. 4:4). Christ, not Satan, will reign a thousand years in the next eon (Lk 1:33). The thousand years will come to an end (Rev. 20:3). Christ will reign in the eon that follows the thousand years (Rev. 22:5 and Lk. 1:33). Hence, He reigns for the "eons" (the next two) "of the eons" (all others). Then the last eon comes to an end (I Cor. 10:11). Christ ceases to reign after the eons come to an end (I Cor. 15:24:28) because He turns over the Kingdom to God His Father and God becomes "all in all." The eons end, but that which is of the Kingdom continues (Lk 1:33 & Isa. 9:7). We all continue "living" after the eons because, just like God, we will then all have been given immortality. All these facts about God's plan of the eons/ages were written by men who were indeed inspired by God's holy spirit. Check the verses yourself. They are not "obscure doctrines". Now tell me in your infinite wisdom how the ages and eternity are the same thing. But remember, the Holy writ of scripture plainly tells us that the eons/ages WILL END! (See Hebrews 9:26 and 1 Corinthians 10:11) Will eternity end Emile? alan

To: Emile Vidrine who wrote (37959)	7/11/2004 7:33:02 PM
From: Berry Picker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39621

Interestingly enough the NKJV does the same thing at Matthew 27:3 NKJV - Then Judas, His betrayer, seeing that He had been condemned, was remorseful and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, Capital "h" signifying that they see this word applied to Christ. That is the only weakness that may exist in your point. It is utter foolishness in my mind to think that Jesus was saying of Himself "for him" instead of "for me" if that was the intent but it is of little import that Christ was betrayed into the hands of sinners - Jesus intended to "offer" Himself. John 10:15 even as the Father knoweth me, and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. 17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. 18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself.... It did not matter that Judas was born from Christ's perspective all Judas did was "kiss Him" what of those who tore out his beard. Would it have been better for HIM if they had not been born... Or what of all those who partook in the beatings, whipping, mockery, spitting, and finally nailing Him to the cross. Would it have been better for Jesus if none of them were born? What a ridiculous twisting of scripture to avoid a hallmark verse that denies Universalism blatantly from the mouth of Jesus. If all men end up in heaven - and only some take a brief dip in the Lake of Fire - then I think Jesus died for nothing. A little suffering for a period of time for the wicked who deserve it compared to the murder of the innocent blood of Christ - it makes God the Father a murderer in my mind to think all that the cross accomplished was to spare the few who are "saved" from a temporary suffering in the lake of fire when we all really deserve it anyways :-) Ask any Christian - if they think Jesus dying to save them from a temporary discomfort would be worth His death? These people think it makes God look better... I think quite the opposite - murder your innocent son for that? Don't look good to me at all - but that is opinion.