Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!
  • Welcome to Talk Jesus Christian Forums

    Celebrating 20 Years!

    A bible based, Jesus Christ centered community.

    Register Log In

Born again and Baptism, What's the connection?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Born again people / non born again people Do go Somewhere.

Born again people are with Jesus Christ upon their death. And Jesus Christ is in heaven preparing a place for born again believers. Eventually this place will be brought down to earth by God, Himself , it will be the New Jerusalem.

The question Seems to be -- how eternal is the lake of fire and brimstone. And 'hell' will end up there.
 
Of all biblical figures, no one talked about Hell more than Jesus, in fact, He talked more about Hell than he did heaven....it's real!!!!
 
Jesus didn't talk about hell. Hell is an English word. He talked about Gehenna and Hades. When people die they go to the grave, Hades. They get resurrected later. The righteous live on earth and the wicked get tossed into the Gehenna, the Lake of Fire.
 
The lake of fire is at the very end. Death and Hades get thrown in there. Death is no more -- because it's Alive.
 
Death as we know it -- will Not be permanent. Revelation 20:13 - 14 " The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according go his works. and the Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. Backing up to verse 10 "The devil, who deceived then,was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Granted I don't have an explanation for 'this is the second death' Because the lake of fire and brimstone was not meant for anyone other than those three. So that would mean that anyone Else there would receive the same fate.

According to their works -- Also suggests that maybe there will be levels of suffering. There Still won't be any escaping.

What Kind of death is being talked about.
 
Death as we know it -- will Not be permanent. Revelation 20:13 - 14 " The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according go his works. and the Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. Backing up to verse 10 "The devil, who deceived then,was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Granted I don't have an explanation for 'this is the second death' Because the lake of fire and brimstone was not meant for anyone other than those three. So that would mean that anyone Else there would receive the same fate.

According to their works -- Also suggests that maybe there will be levels of suffering. There Still won't be any escaping.

What Kind of death is being talked about.
You said death was alive. What does that mean?

The second death is just like the first one, that's why it's called the second one. It's a bodily death. Jesus said all will be resurrected.

Regarding "forever and ever" the Greek word that is translated, "forever and ever" is the Greek word aion. Aion doesn't mean forever, it's wrongly translated. It should be translated as age.

And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world? (Matt. 24:3 KJV)

Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (Matt. 28:20 KJV)


Here Jesus and the apostles both speak of the end of the aion. Forever, by definition doesn't end, so aion can't mean forever.

And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. (Matt. 12:32 KJV)

Here Jesus speaks of this aion and the one to come. Surely He isn't saying in this forever and the one to come. If forever doesn't end how is there another one to come? However, He can easily be saying in this age or the one to come.
 
If I may, an eternal torment in an everlasting fire would require an IMMORTAL soul, which an unregenerate human does not have. The wages of sin are death,
not immortality. The only humans possessing immortality, spiritually, are those that are Born again.

The concept of Hell as eternal torment also requires free will of man, which I believe your Bible like mine says that "God hath concluded ALL IN UNBELIEF,
that he might HAVE MERCY ON ALL."

And " As many as were ORDAINED TO ETERNAL LIFE BELIEVED."
Also " Them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were APPOINTED."


In this scenario of God ordaining some to believe and others appointed to disobedience he takes the credit for both. So why would he then eternally torment those
that he appointed to disobedience?


He wouldn't.

But organized religion uses this misunderstood concept to create fear to bring in more disciples of the organization and increase the coffers, as well
as pet their own carnality as it says to them they made the right choice and deserve to be in the Kingdom and those that did not make the same choice as they
deserve what they get. What a terrible distortion of the Gospel(GOOD NEWS) of Gods reconciliation of man by the crucifixion of his Son.

Totally wrong concept of a God who is Love! And has blinded the eyes of those appointed to disobedience. But if he will not allow one to understand what he is really
doing then one will remain blind until he decides to let one in on it.

"Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ORDAINED YOU, that ye should go and bring forth fruit."
"For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ORDAINED."
Acts 13:48 "......... as many as were ORDAINED TO ETERNAL LIFE BELIEVED."
Ephesians 1:11 "...........being PREDESTINATED according to the purpose of him, who worketh ALL THINGS ACCORDING TO HIS OWN WILL:"

What choice is in any of these verses that create a thought process whereby one deserves eternal life with the Father or eternal torment?

This is the second death.

It's a clue. Your in the first one now and the second looks just like the first as the main characters of religion, governments, Satan, death, the grave are all there as
they are here now.

Consider that DEATH is the last enemy to be destroyed. How can this be?
1Co 15:22 " As in Adam all die even so in Christ shall ALL be made alive." But EVERY MAN in his own order......." it is at the moment that the last person to be made
alive in Christ (Born again) has taken place that death will have no dominion over any man and death will have been destroyed. It has no power any longer as ALL
have been made ALIVE. This is what the cross of Jesus bought for ALL.
 
If I may, an eternal torment in an everlasting fire would require an IMMORTAL soul, which an unregenerate human does not have. The wages of sin are death,
not immortality. The only humans possessing immortality, spiritually, are those that are Born again.

The concept of Hell as eternal torment also requires free will of man, which I believe your Bible like mine says that "God hath concluded ALL IN UNBELIEF,
that he might HAVE MERCY ON ALL."

And " As many as were ORDAINED TO ETERNAL LIFE BELIEVED."
Also " Them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were APPOINTED."


In this scenario of God ordaining some to believe and others appointed to disobedience he takes the credit for both. So why would he then eternally torment those
that he appointed to disobedience?


He wouldn't.

But organized religion uses this misunderstood concept to create fear to bring in more disciples of the organization and increase the coffers, as well
as pet their own carnality as it says to them they made the right choice and deserve to be in the Kingdom and those that did not make the same choice as they
deserve what they get. What a terrible distortion of the Gospel(GOOD NEWS) of Gods reconciliation of man by the crucifixion of his Son.

Totally wrong concept of a God who is Love! And has blinded the eyes of those appointed to disobedience. But if he will not allow one to understand what he is really
doing then one will remain blind until he decides to let one in on it.

"Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ORDAINED YOU, that ye should go and bring forth fruit."
"For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ORDAINED."
Acts 13:48 "......... as many as were ORDAINED TO ETERNAL LIFE BELIEVED."
Ephesians 1:11 "...........being PREDESTINATED according to the purpose of him, who worketh ALL THINGS ACCORDING TO HIS OWN WILL:"

What choice is in any of these verses that create a thought process whereby one deserves eternal life with the Father or eternal torment?



It's a clue. Your in the first one now and the second looks just like the first as the main characters of religion, governments, Satan, death, the grave are all there as
they are here now.

Consider that DEATH is the last enemy to be destroyed. How can this be?
1Co 15:22 " As in Adam all die even so in Christ shall ALL be made alive." But EVERY MAN in his own order......." it is at the moment that the last person to be made
alive in Christ (Born again) has taken place that death will have no dominion over any man and death will have been destroyed. It has no power any longer as ALL
have been made ALIVE. This is what the cross of Jesus bought for ALL.
I agree with you that man is not immortal. I don't agree with your denial of free will.
 
I agree with you that man is not immortal. I don't agree with your denial of free will.


Which part of ORDAINED TO BELIEVE, or APPOINTED TO DISOBEDIENCE makes you believe in free will? Not to mention that God works all things according to his
own wil
l, which makes my will irrelevant. Ephesians 1:11

Those ordained to believe are simply the first fruits in the first death. There will be a second crop in the second death, but it will be in Gods timing as he chooses the
order for EVERY MAN.
Those appointed to disobedience are simply those like the Roman soldiers who carried out the crucifixion of Jesus. He did say forgive them for they know
not what they do
. The disobedient and unbelievers are necessary for the maturing process of the ORDAINED. It is referred to as the MYSTERY OF INIQUITY in the Bible.

I realize this thread is not about free will but just responding to your post.
 
When a person is feeling the convicting power of the Holy Spirit, they Know it. They will respond to God sometime during This present life-time. There are those who never will. God is sovereign -- He knows everything -- He has His perfect plan. We Don't -- We don't know who the chosen of God are. Those who Do accept Christ as personal Savior obviously Are. WE have been told to go and share the Gospel unto salvation with all who will listen / make disciples of them. And Then baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit..
 
Greetings Brother,

Regarding "forever and ever" the Greek word that is translated, "forever and ever" is the Greek word aion. Aion doesn't mean forever, it's wrongly translated. It should be translated as age.

yes. However we also note that while Aion [aiôn] translates word for word to age [in English, thus far] that 'for ever and ever' perhaps renders better as 'to the ages of the ages'. It has been put forth that the idea conveyed by the phrase here is of circles of duration consisting of, embracing, other circles ad infinitum. *

Others suggest: For ever and ever; literally, for the ages of ages; for the ages which consist, not of years, but of ages, for the countless ages of eternity ^

For me, the interpretation [?] comes from the Scripture
for example:
The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.
Isaiah 40:8

where we read the word [in English], "forever" which if we look at something like Strong's, we see olam:

olam: long duration, antiquity, futurity
Original Word: עוֹלָם
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: olam
Phonetic Spelling: (o-lawm')
Definition: long duration, antiquity, futurity

and elsewhere #
ages (1), all successive (1), always (1), ancient (13), ancient times (3), continual (1), days of old (1), eternal (2), eternity (3), ever (10), Everlasting (2), everlasting (110), forever (136), forever and ever (1), forever* (70), forevermore* (1), lasting (1), long (2), long ago (3), long past (1), long time (3), never* (17), old (11), permanent (10), permanently (1), perpetual (29), perpetually (1).


The Lord bless you ....><>

Your word, O LORD, is everlasting; it is firmly fixed in the heavens.

Psalm 119:89


* c/o The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
^ c/o The Pulpit Commentary
# c/o NAS Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible with Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries
 
God is sovereign -- He knows everything -- He has His perfect plan.

Indeed. And it includes ALL MANKIND.

They will respond to God sometime during This present life-time.

Not true, that is why there is a second death era. He calls men according to his own schedule. Not our made up idea of what he should do.
As in Adam ALL DIE. even so IN CHRIST shall ALL BE MADE ALIVE, BUT EVERY MAN in his own order....... These are the words of the Bible therefore the words
of God. Can we not just believe him even if we do not understand yet?
 
Can we not just believe him even if we do not understand yet?

Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, for to this you were called as members of one body. And be thankful.

Colossians 3:15

And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.
Philippians 4:7
 
Not sure Butch where you are headed in all this. I know you have the support of a well established Moderator ,as a fellow
Christian, I support you too but, with all due respect, I don't see you understanding much about the scriptures!
 
Which part of ORDAINED TO BELIEVE, or APPOINTED TO DISOBEDIENCE makes you believe in free will? Not to mention that God works all things according to his
own wil
l, which makes my will irrelevant. Ephesians 1:11

Those ordained to believe are simply the first fruits in the first death. There will be a second crop in the second death, but it will be in Gods timing as he chooses the
order for EVERY MAN.
Those appointed to disobedience are simply those like the Roman soldiers who carried out the crucifixion of Jesus. He did say forgive them for they know
not what they do
. The disobedient and unbelievers are necessary for the maturing process of the ORDAINED. It is referred to as the MYSTERY OF INIQUITY in the Bible.

I realize this thread is not about free will but just responding to your post.

One thing to keep in mind is that when most of our English Bibles were originally translated, it was by the Reformers. Take for instance, Acts 13:48 that you posted. This is how the Reformers translated it.

And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed. (Acts 13:48 KJV)

Here's how it is in the Greek text.

Ἀκούοντα δὲ τὰ ἔθνη ἔχαιρεν,1 καὶ ἐδόξαζον τὸν λόγον τοῦ κυρίου, καὶ ἐπίστευσαν ὅσοι ἦσαν τεταγμένοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον. (Acts 13:48 BYZ)

Here's how Young's literal translations translates it.

Acts 13:48 And the nations hearing were glad, and were glorifying the word of the Lord, and did believe -- as many as were appointed to life age-during; (Acts 13:48 YLT)

The first thing to notice is where the word believe falls in the verse. Notice the KJV has believed at the end of the verse. However, in the Greek text the word believe is before appointed. Also, Young's has added the hyphen after believe. Without the hyphen it would look like this.

And the nations hearing were glad, and were glorifying the word of the Lord, and did believe as many as were appointed to life age-during;

There are two ways you could understand this. You could say, and did believe, as many as were appointed to life age-during. Or, you could say, and did believe as many as, were appointed to life age-during. In other words you could read it as, as many as were ordained to eternal life believed or you could read it as, as many as believed where ordained to eternal life.

Which one is right? We know from the context which it is. Firstly, the word, "τεταγμένοι", that is translated appointed, also means to arrange in order. However, the word is in the Greek middle/passive voice. The middle voice means that the subject, in this case "as many as believed", both performs and receives the action of the verb. In other words, he does it to himself. We know that the verb is in the middle voice because 2 verses prior Paul says of the Jews.

45 But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming.
46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.
48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed. (Acts 13:45-48 KJV)


In this passage Paul says that the Jews rejected the word of God and judged themselves unworthy of age-during life. So, the reason those Jews don't receive age-during life is due to their own decisions. Their salvation or lack of is based on their decision. Since the Jews did it to themselves regarding salvation so too did the Gentiles. So, unless one wants to argue that Paul is saying the Jews get to choose salvation and the Gentiles don't, one has to understand verse 48 as I've stated above. If one chooses to accept the Reformed understanding they have to accept two different methods of salvation, one of choice and one of necessity.

But, this isn't the only place the Reformers changed the word order of the text. The did the same in 1 Peter to fit their theology.

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. (1 Pet. 1:1-2 KJV)

Verse 2 doesn't say elect according to the foreknowledge of God. The word translated elect is "eklectos" it's actually in verse one.

Πέτρος, ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ, ἐκλεκτοῖς παρεπιδήμοις διασπορᾶς Πόντου, Γαλατίας, Καππαδοκίας, Ἀσίας, καὶ Βιθυνίας,
2 κατὰ πρόγνωσιν θεοῦ πατρός, ἐν ἁγιασμῷ πνεύματος, εἰς ὑπακοὴν καὶ ῥαντισμὸν αἵματος Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ· χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη πληθυνθείη. (1 Pet. 1:1-2 BYZ)


Here's how Young's Literal Translation has it.

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the choice sojourners of the dispersion of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
2 according to a foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, to obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace be multiplied! (1 Pet. 1:1-2 YLT)

Peter says, "to the choice sojourners of he dispersion". The word "choice" is the word elect. Peter is addressing the elect sojourners of the Diaspora. The Diaspora was a term for the Jews who were scattered among the nations. He uses elect in conjunction with the Jews. He's not saying people are elect according to God's forknowledge.

I'd be happy to address the other passages in your post, however, I don't really want to derail this thread. If you start another thread I'd be happy to address them.
 
Greetings Brother,



yes. However we also note that while Aion [aiôn] translates word for word to age [in English, thus far] that 'for ever and ever' perhaps renders better as 'to the ages of the ages'. It has been put forth that the idea conveyed by the phrase here is of circles of duration consisting of, embracing, other circles ad infinitum. *

Others suggest: For ever and ever; literally, for the ages of ages; for the ages which consist, not of years, but of ages, for the countless ages of eternity ^

For me, the interpretation [?] comes from the Scripture
for example:
The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.
Isaiah 40:8

where we read the word [in English], "forever" which if we look at something like Strong's, we see olam:

olam: long duration, antiquity, futurity
Original Word: עוֹלָם
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: olam
Phonetic Spelling: (o-lawm')
Definition: long duration, antiquity, futurity

and elsewhere #
ages (1), all successive (1), always (1), ancient (13), ancient times (3), continual (1), days of old (1), eternal (2), eternity (3), ever (10), Everlasting (2), everlasting (110), forever (136), forever and ever (1), forever* (70), forevermore* (1), lasting (1), long (2), long ago (3), long past (1), long time (3), never* (17), old (11), permanent (10), permanently (1), perpetual (29), perpetually (1).


The Lord bless you ....><>

Your word, O LORD, is everlasting; it is firmly fixed in the heavens.
Psalm 119:89


* c/o The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
^ c/o The Pulpit Commentary
# c/o NAS Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible with Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries
HI Br. Bear,

I personally don't think forever and ever should be used at all. I think unto the ages of the ages is a much better translation. The reason is, once we say aion or olam means forever, it no longer can mean anything less that forever. Aion and olam clearly are used of things that don't last forever. The word can't mean both infinite and finite, in such a case it would be useless to communicate. I think age is the better translation because an age is an undefined period of time. Could God make an age that never ended? He could. Could He make an age that ends, He could. However, once we define aion or olam as forever, they no longer mean an age of limited duration. When the Hebrew texts were translated into Greek, the Septuagint, the translators chose to use the word aion as the translation for olam. Here is a definition of what olam meant,


I think if you read this you'll see why the translators chose , ages of ages to translate olam. It makes perfect sense.

The reason I don't think forever or eternity should be used is because of the way translators use different words to translate certain words. What happen is that they'll take a word like aion and in certain places they'll translate is forever, yet in other places they'll translate it something else. This creates a problem for English readers because they don't see the way the word is used in Scripture. They don't see that the same word aion is used in other ways that don't mean forever. It also creates problem passages where things are said to be forever that clearly aren't forever. For instance,

32 "He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David.
33 "And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end." (Lk. 1:32-33 NKJ)


In this passage aion is translated forever. It says that Jesus will reign forever. That's not correct according to Paul.

23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ's at His coming.
24 Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power.
25 For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet.
26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.
27 For "He has put all things under His feet1." But when He says "all things are put under Him," it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted.
28 Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the (1 Cor. 15:23-28 NKJ)


Here Pau;l says that Jesus will reign until all things are put under His feet and that He will hand the kingdom over to the Father and then Christ Himself will be subject to the Father. Can you see how translating aion as eternal or forever creates conflicting passages? If we translate it as age, we can Jesus reigns for the age and then hands the kingdom over to the Father.
 
Not sure Butch where you are headed in all this. I know you have the support of a well established Moderator ,as a fellow
Christian, I support you too but, with all due respect, I don't see you understanding much about the scriptures!
I'm not headed anywhere, just answering questions. I don't know any of the moderators other than interacting here.

Actually, I understand the Scriptures fairly well. I've spent the last 12 years or so studying them in depth. That's why much of what I say seems different to you. I've gone back to the very beginning to get past all of the baggage and false teachings that have been added over the last 1900 years. I've looked at the very beginning of the faith. If I want to know what the first faith was what better way than to study the writings of those who were taught by the apostles. You see, Clement of Rome was a disciple of Paul and is mentioned in the NT. Ignatius and Polycarp were disciples of the apostle John. Christians today will read commentaries to help them understand something Paul or John said. They'll read a commentary that is fairly modern written by someone made a few decades ago, someone who likely went to Seminary. Someone that is not very different than they are. However, imagine reading a commentary by someone who was taught by Paul or John. Imaging reading a commentary by someone who could say hey, Paul when you said xyz, what did you mean? Or John, when you said, Jesus said, xyz, what did He mean? I would much rather have a commentary written by someone who knew the apostles or those who immediately followed them. They were there. They're not trying to figure out what was meant, they knew it . Also they all spoke Greek. It wasn't a foreign closed language to them, as it is to us.

Having studied the early Christians I've found that much of what is taught today they knew nothing about. Much of what is taught today they would call heresy. And quite a bit of what they taught has simply been lost or neglected. I've looked at what they taught and compared it to Scripture. I've looked at their arguments and for the most part they are spot on. Are they perfect? No, they made mistakes but for the most part they are right on track. The ones who were taught by the apostles are spot on. The ones who came later need to be scrutinized more closely. However, what you find in the beginning is that all of the churches taught the same things.

I would encourage everyone to study the early church. If for no other reason than to understand how the faith developed over time. One can see where errors entered in. You said you don't me understanding the Scriptures much. Let me give you something for consideration. In the year 325, the Church and Roman state merged. The Church quickly departed from several doctrines that had been held for the first 300 years of Christianity. Before the Church merged with the Roman state, Christians would not use violence for any reason at all. One Christian leader wrote, 'in our religion it is better to be killed than to kill'. Do modern Christians say that? Nope. If someone broke into the home of many Christians today they'd be looking down a barrel. Not too long after the church and state merged Christians began going to war. Before that it was simply unacceptable. That merger became the Catholic Church and when the Roman empire fell, the Roman Church continued on. For roughly 1000 years the Roman Catholic Church was pretty much the sole authority on the Christian Scriptures in western civilization. The Catholic Church had full control over doctrine. It said what was and was not doctrine. Most Christians didn't have access to the Scriptures to even be able to question anything the Church taught. How much error do you suppose that would allow into the faith over a thousand years? The Reformation actually started because of all of the error that had entered the Church. The reformers saw all of the errors that had entered into the Church and set about to fix them. They did fix many, however, they too were of Catholic roots, so there was still quite a bit of error that they didn't see wrong. They too looked at history to see what was original, however, they only went back to around the 5th century so they missed a good bit of the errors that had entered before the 5th century. They fixed the errors they saw, they also brought some of their own. The problem is that they didn't go back far enough. They should have gone to the beginning.

Anything I say can be shown from Scripture properly exegeted and in context. As I said, it seems different to you, and it seems different to what most Christians are taught today, because it is. But, it is what the Scriptures teach.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top