 |
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
Contact Clothman
I’ll post a Missoulian announcement one more time because I continue to get so many inquires as to why I’m not in paper much any more. The managing editor (Sherry Devlin) made a decision to cut me from weekly to monthly about around three months ago. You’ll have to ask her why she made that decision because she has never called me or responded to my emails, so there’s not much I can say. As to why I haven’t even been in The Missoulian monthly (as so many continue to ask), all I can tell you about that is that I have a column on file there... Thank you for all the kind notes of appreciation for my columns over the past 10 years. As far as the future, I am indeed moving on and continue to write. I’m in the final stages of my manuscript with Steve Rogers for our book, “The Good News About Hell.” It really is turning out to be a good read; I look forward to being able to share it with folks. I’m also making progress on a couple of other books that I’ve always wanted to write but never had time to. I’m having columns accepted in other publications and more all the time now that I’m not so tied down with my dedication to the Missoulian. It’s kind of fun because these other publications actually pay me for my work, while my gig with the Missoulian was always without pay (except for a 10 month stretch several years ago). Finally, I’m pretty much over the wound of not being able to leave (or be cut by) the Missoulian on better more cordial terms. It hurt because I thought I was of more value to them than it turns out I was. It also hurt because I had invested an unhealthy amount of my own self-worth in that column appearing weekly across Again thanks for all your kind feedback about The Adventures of Clothman. I’ll continue to post columns on my website and blogs as often as I can. Call Sherry Devlin at 523-5250 (voice mail) or email her at sdevlin@missoulian.com.
Clothreader responses to "Iffy" column 1/5/08 I didn't think the column was out of line at all. As a radio personality, I share details of life's joy and sorrow with listeners. I do so for one reason: To reiterate to the listener that I am just like them. I think it is important for media people to do that from time to time. It makes us more real. And let's be serious...unless you're Bill Gates, Donald Trump, or some other yahoo with money to burn, taking a 100,000 dollar kick in the shorts (especially when you did nothing wrong) would knock anyone for a loop. I'd REALLY worry about you if you DIDN'T get a little bent about it. -B I'm so sorry to hear about your bad stuff, but I've got to tell you this comes off a little whiney and doesn't provide enough information for which the reader can then base her or her judgment. You seem to be looking for that, for more validation from more people that you were right and they (whoever they and/or what are) were wrong. It's not a matter of forgiveness or vindication, it's about learning from experiences and moving on, and not looking back, and not making the same mistake twice. God had his hand in what happened Clothman, not to you, but to me. Facing that has been very hard, but I've gotten to the point where acceptance has helped put it behind me. -T I think your column is just fine. We have always related better to people who are honest. I don't see how anyone could easily handle the loss of the $100,000. Whether they had that much in savings or not. Who am I kidding...I don't know hardly anyone who even saves money! You have every right to feel frightened, sad, and concerned. It doesn't help to say that someone in -D
RED ARE LETTERS TO ME Blue are my responses *********These stars indicate a dialogue has started with a new person
3/21/07 Clothman It's refreshing to see a clergy person of this day actually voicing their own beliefs developed from their own research/communion with God and willingly subjecting themselves to the ensuing controversy and, sometimes, condemnation. Thanks for the kind words Jane. I think that leaders have more trouble with alternative beliefs or stepping back to take a fresh look at beliefs than do the masses - especially with the advent of the Internet and the information age. Anyone who reads my columns or hears me speak knows that I use the Bible as an authoritative reference, but I don't believe all truth comes from it. Jesus said that the Spirit would lead us into all truth, not the Bible (especially since the Bible wasn't put together as we have it now until a few hundred years after Jesus). So I think Jesus would concur with much of what you say - as do I. Where I might beg to differ with you Jane is that I'm hesitant to "stand by my beliefs" these days in a dogmatic fashion. That kind of rigidity is what caused some religious groups in town to excommunicate me. I now hold most of my beliefs in an open hand. Not that I don't think beliefs are important, for they are. Nor would I say that I don’t remain open to what others believe, for I do. But I think it is even more important to "stand by my relationships." I believe that is why Jesus reduced everything down to two things: love God and love others as we love ourselves. Thanks again for taking the time to write and encourage me, that was most kind. clothman
I've just spent a couple hours going over your notes, articles, and emails with other people, skimming mostly, as there is a lot. I've been wanting to communicate with you about this for awhile. I'd like to ask you some questions if I may.
You've said nobody would choose hell knowingly. You want to bet? I've met many who have. I've described it in detail, and many having all the information have outright chosen it. That's how strong hatred toward God can be. Hard as it is to believe, there are many who don't want to be with God. They don't want to go to heaven. I've done enough interviews to know this for sure. If I understand you right, you are saying God will force everyone to be with Him, even against their will. That's not what my Bible says. Here I will post just three scriptures, hoping to hear back from you. What do you say about Revelation 21:8, which says all liars, (among other offenders) "shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death." What do you do with that one? Sounds like hell to me. And how about Matthew 7:22-23, where Jesus says, "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
Steve Steve, You have been most kind to spend time going over the material on my website before responding (unfortunately, many who disagree do not take the time to do so). You have also expressed your disagreement with my position with a good heart and I appreciate all of that very much. I'm certainly trying to remain open-minded to input from others. The day I think I know it all I know I will know nothing.
Steve, you make a very serious statement when you say, "To deny hell, you'd have to deny God's word. To do that, you'd have to be unsaved, because a born again believer won't reject the very word of God. With that, you may not believe in hell now, but, sadly, you will when you get there. This "coming out" for you shows that you actually were never saved to begin with, hence your feelings that something about hell just wasn't quite right. I do pray for your salvation." Are you sure that you want to be the one who is determining who is going to heaven and who is going to hell? I would rather leave that up to God - I know I don't have the ability or the desire to judge another man's heart and soul. I'm also wondering where it says that one's doctrine is what determines who is saved and who is not. I thought it was based upon the saving work of Jesus Christ on the cross - not what one believes about hell. You also said that I am denying God's word by not believing in a literal, eternal hell. Yet, it was God's word that caused me to no longer believe in a literal, eternal hell. I used to view Bible passages the same way you do, but was always left wondering why so many other passages just didn't seem to fit. For example in Luke 15 where the point of Jesus' stories is to tell us that God doesn't loose anything or anyone (including those who reject him). And if only those who put their faith in Christ are going to be saved, then why does Paul say that "For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive." ...and just a few verses later, "...so that God may be all in all." (1 Cor. 15:20-28). Or when Paul talks about how God is going to restore "all things" in Christ in Eph 2:1-10 - no because of works, but solely because of his grace. And I could go on and on and on. I suppose you may disagree Steve, but I feel I honor God's word now just as I did before (perhaps even more so). Now to answer your specific questions. I still don't believe anyone would willingly choose hell if they had all the facts and information available to them and they were of a sound mind. However, none of us have that type of information available in this life. Furthermore, scripture says that the enemy has blinded the eyes of those who are perishing. That because of sin our best works (including decision making) are as filthy rags. That without faith, no one can please God, yet faith comes from God. And that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. That we are all dead in our sins and transgressions. ...I'm sure I need not go on - you get my point. How, with all that going against us, can we possibly be expected to make great decisions. I think it is especially illogical to expect that we can make good spiritual decisions, when in fact we are spiritually dead apart from Christ? It's not only tough to do - I'd say impossible. That's why I don't believe God left our salvation up to us. Over and over again the Bible says thing like: "...at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly ...While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." (Romans 5) And, "God who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions - it is by grace you have been saved." (Eph 2:1-10) God didn't wait for us to get it right because he knew that because of sin we never would, or could. Instead, he sent his son Jesus Christ to make it right ...his son who said, "You did not choose me, I choose you..." (John 15:8) (I'm sure you've read my responses where I deal with the topic of Salvation by Works. I believe faith opens up a relationship with God. Faith causes us to become a new creation. Faith brings with it the fullness of the Holy Spirit who enables us to live a godly life, etc. However, I do not believe that we are saved when we make the decision to put our faith in Christ. That would mean that we are saved by works - our works, not Christ's. Faith is the gift of God the Bible says, but it certainly isn't a means of salvation.) Regarding Matthew 7:21-23. I know why you see "kingdom of heaven" here to mean heaven and "depart from me" to mean hell, but I believe you are reading something into the text that isn't there. As you know, Matt 7:21-23 is part of the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5-7). The Sermon on the Mount is Jesus' manifesto on how to live the kingdom life here on earth. As he said in the Lord's prayer in Matt 6:9 "Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven." Jesus prayer and indeed the Sermon on the Mount is instructing us on how to be a part of the kingdom of heaven while still living on earth. Jesus said in John 14:3: "This is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom (God has) sent. "The phrase "eternal life" literally means "life of the ages" and could be thought of as opposing "life as people are living it today." The kingdom of heaven/kingdom of God is a life that is full and overflowing, a life that is centered on a relationship with God. People who believe in a literal hell often misinterpret Jesus' phrases "eternal life," "kingdom of heaven" and " Jesus isn't talking about heaven and hell - far from it. He's talking about people on earth that say they are following him but in fact are false prophets - people whose fruit is not good. Finally, about Revelation. I haven't said anything about names in the book of life, so I'm not sure what others are saying, but I didn't say it. Regarding Revelation in general, if I can't find hell in the Old Testament, or in the Gospels, or in the writings of the Apostles, then why would I expect to find it in Revelation? So please, ask me about places where you think hell is in all of the books prior to Revelation and if we make progress there, then ask me about Revelation. blazing trails, 3/06/07 In reference to Ray Comfort's message, you said "He seems to be stopping just a bit short and overlooking the fact that the law, the old covenant, was abolished by Jesus in order to bring the new covenant into being." Ray knows this, and would never teach that. I guess perhaps he didn't say so in his message because it's a given, but who knows. Ray and I know that Jesus did fulfill the Law where we couldn't, and offers us His righteousness. In that you are correct. But where we disagree is if that gets applied to everyone, and how. We are justified by faith. That means no faith = no justification. (Gal. 3:24) "Are you sure that you want to be the one who is determining who is going to heaven and who is going to hell? I would rather leave that up to God - I know I don't have the ability or the desire to judge another man's heart and soul." I agree. I will be bold, but must be careful in my words. I did not mean to judge you to hell, it's just that I often use discernment to see where somebody may need to be warned. That doesn't mean I'm always right. I must be careful how I put things. I believe a person grows in holiness when they are saved. If they turn back on doctrine or jump head first back into their previous sinful lifestyle, it's likely that they are not backsliding, because they never slid forward in the first place. That is what I was getting at. "For example in Luke 15 where the point of Jesus' stories is to tell us that God doesn't loose anything or anyone (including those who reject him)." Luke 15 shows how God actively seeks us and offers everyone a chance, although nowhere in this chapter are they forced. Nobody rejected God here, as you implied. The lost son chose to come back to his father, he wasn't rejecting him then but had changed his mind, an example of repentance. "And if only those who put their faith in Christ are going to be saved, then why does Paul say that "For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive." Context is always critical. With study, we see here that all believers will be made alive. For example, Gal. 3:26: "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus." That's by faith, not by force. People can reject Him. You say that salvation by faith is a work, but that is clearly refuted in Ephesians 2:8-9, which would counter what you are saying: "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." That says it all right there. Salvation is by faith, not works. The two are clearly separated. "As you know, Matt 7:21-23 is part of the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5-7). The Sermon on the Mount is Jesus' manifesto on how to live the kingdom life here on earth." Truly, Jesus gave much instruction for us in that sermon that applies to the here and now, but, being God, He also had a great focus on eternity. Going through these chapters, I don't see how you could possibly take all references to the afterlife to be here on earth at this time. Jesus repeatedly refers to consequences and rewards in an eternal sense (Matthew 5:20, 6:19, 7:19). Heaven (and hell) is mentioned so much in this sermon that there can be no mistake Jesus is referring to the afterlife and a time of the promised new heaven and earth, in which we know only those saved will be there. "Regarding Revelation in general, if I can't find hell in the Old Testament, or in the Gospels, or in the writings of the Apostles, then why would I expect to find it in Revelation? I am very disappointed that you want to avoid talking about Revelation. Two of the three proofs of hell I offered from scripture came from there. Although from your position I can see why you want it to be off limits. Revelation offers some of the most clear proof of all there is a hell. If you are going to dismiss some of my scriptural references altogether, I'm afraid we are not on an even playing field, meaning I will look at your references, but you won't look at mine. I don't see that as being fair. What happened to open dialog? Would you reconsider? In all fairness, the entirety of God's word should be open for discussing something of this magnitude. Revelation 14:11 makes reference to those in hell, saying "the smoke of their torment ascendeth up forever and ever". I know how you feel about Revelation, but it does prove there is a hell, which to be blunt, I believe is why you want to avoid it. Five times Jesus speaks the words "weeping and gnashing of teeth" in the KJV to describe those in hell. (Matthew 8:12, 22:13, 24:51, 25:30) and in Luke 13:27-28, where Jesus says "But He shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out." That sounds pretty clear to me. What do you think? Steve Steve, I know the paradigm you are using to read scripture, I used the same one for nearly two decades. I know every answer and argument you have told me (so far) about these Bible passages because I’ve written and preached the same ones for years. But I no longer use the same paradigm which you do. After much study and prayer, I’ve obviously made some changes. And even though I know we’re reading the same Bible, it sure doesn’t seem that way at times. And there in lies a concern I have. I thoroughly enjoy dialogue, but I’m not too excited about debate. Dialogue travels the road together toward discovery. Debate, justifies and dignifies division. Debate forces people to take different paths; then goes the extra length to name one path “right” and the other “wrong.” After re-reading our latest responses to each other, I think we’re traveling down the road of debate – and I don’t like where it is taking us. We’re not trying to understand where each other is coming from; we’re each trying to defend our individual doctrines. In other words, we’re putting doctrine over relationship and that is very, very dangerous. I noticed this when I started to respond to your latest letter. I found myself just taking us even further apart. Thus, I stopped and am wondering what good that would do either of us? What’s the point? Steve, you obviously love God and you have a love for his Word. My guess is you put effort into loving others as well. Jesus said that the most important things are to love God and love others as we love ourselves. Dude, you’re doing it. So why would I want to spend an hour or two formulating an email to tell you that basically says you’re wrong and I’m right? I think I’d rather just say, “Steve, you go dude! I don’t need you to agree with me regarding grace and hell for me to be an encourager to you. I don’t want some doctrine telling me you aren’t my brother when in fact your life is bearing fruit that says you are. Who knows, perhaps down the road we can engage in a dialogue, but for now that doesn’t seem to be happening. Sorry bro. Clothman
****************************************************************************** Fred & Clothman On Hell Fred, Sorry to hear that we will no longer be able to our email dialogue. I must agree that you have certainly given this a lot of time and effort. Thank you. I respect both your willingness to dialogue in the past and reasons why you feel you can’t in the future. So I’ll respond one last time to your letter. Addressing your last concern first, I’ve tried very hard to not use your comments to serve my purpose. The very reason why I’ve posted mostly letters of folks who don’t agree with me is to give a fair hearing to perspectives on my page that differ from mine. I was trying to not do the very thing you feel like I was doing – I can’t explain that. I guess it is a matter of perspective regarding what it means to “listen to Scripture” as you say. The very way I got to my “new” position on hell and salvation by grace not works was by listening to scriptures that didn’t agree with my previous viewpoint. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that you and I have a different interpretation of some scriptures. All of which means that what is often purported to be a “clear teaching of scripture” is determined by the eyes of the beholder. What is clear to me is obviously is not clear to you and vise versa. Second, your second point. Since honesty is my highest virtue, it stings to be accused of being dishonest. For that reason, I will do what I have never done in print form before. I will give a brief response to my being removed from the Evangelical group in my home town. The definition of excommunication is “to be excluded from fellowship.” I know this term is a bit loaded and I am careful how and when I use it. However, it is what occurred with the Evangelical group. I was not given a choice as to whether or not I could remain a part of the group. I was given the option to resign or be removed in what would have certainly become an ugly protracted doctrinal circus. Of course, I chose the prior because the later would only damage the cause of Christ worse than what was already happening. My “resignation” was done in protest, with great grief and without option. Since you weren’t there I am going to post the exact comments that I read at both of my excommunication ceremonies. This is what actually happened. I’ll let you determine from them if my behavior was appropriate or not based upon these facts. Finally, your first concern last. I do indeed hold a position which says that if hell cannot be found or proven in the first 65 books of the Bible than I’m not going to rely on the 66th book to prove it – especially since that book is primarily written in the mysterious apocryphal language that nobody can “clearly” decipher clearly 2000 years after it was written. (There are as many interpretations of Revelation as there are readers). That isn’t to say that I haven’t read and studied Revelation, for of course I have many, many times. Regarding 2 John 7-11, I must admit that I am indeed guilty as charged. I did say that I will not literally do what John says when he wrote: “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him. Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work.” Frankly, I think the only reason why Jesus didn’t violate John’s teaching here is because he didn’t own his own home. But Jesus certainly went into many a home of those who didn’t agree with his teaching and I fail to see how he shared in their wicked works. You said, “Shame on you for refusing to accept the clear teachings of the Lord and refusing to obey them.” Actually, I think I am accepting the Lord’s clear teachings and obeying them when I decide to error on the side of love. I’m following Jesus’ commands when I love my enemies and do good to those who persecute me. I’m obeying Christ when I show love and honor to all. Forgiving folks who often times do not know what they are doing is exactly what Jesus did. So, I’m going to follow Jesus and not John in regard to these two verses. However, all that said I still don’t see how you can site this passage of scripture to refuse or accuse me. The deceivers that John is talking about are those “who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh…” I’ve never denied that. Okay, that’s that. I think this exchange has been very helpful for lots of folks and I do thank you for it. It has probably run its course; however Fred, in fairness I want to give you the opportunity to have the last word without comment from me. If you respond I’ll simply post your response without me following it up. I too like you and think you have a wonderful spirit. May God richly bless your life in the Clothman
2/7/07 Clothman (from Sue) Well I have had time to do a little studying, though not as thoroughly yet as I want. It seems you & I have a different view of what "works" entails. I look at it as doing good deeds to try to get into heaven. From what I gather, your view is if you need to accept Jesus as Lord & Savior to get into heaven, that entails works. So we have a disagreement on what works is. Second--I believe God gave everyone a free will. That means to mean he lets us choose whether we want to accept his gift of salvation through Jesus. If you get the salvation whether or not you accept him here on earth does not speak to our free will of choosing. I understand that you are saying that after death individuals can still accept Jesus. The bible says Jesus preached to the dead, and also the bible says every knee shall bow and every tongue confess. I do not see where it says after the preaching to the dead that they were all saved, or where after the knee bowing and confessing that they were automatically saved. I do see where (people) said Lord, Lord, (a false acceptance) and he said Depart from me, I do not know you. To me that says even though they finally realized the truth, at that point it was too late. I think you have to make the decision while you are still alive. Also the parting of the goats & sheep and the throwing into lake of fire, I do not see where they come out of the lake of fire after a time. I think the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, where the rich man dies and is in torment, and Lazarus goes to heaven & the rich man calls out for help but there is a chasm between the two places, and also God says when the rich man wants his relatives warned, that they have the profits and the word to warn them. I think even though this is not an actual event (or is it? ) Doesn't matter either way, I think it is to inform us of how things are or will be. I would not discount that some dead could be saved after death, I think it may depend if they had ever heard the gospel and made a decision before they died, only God know. If that is the case I still do not think that is going to apply to those that did make a decision before death. Anyway, that is where I am now, though I am still looking into it. Sue Sue, Way to go! You are pursuing truth and that is more important than whether you or I are correct. Knowing God (who is Truth) is always more important the knowing things about God. I also want to commend your desire to continue dialogue with me on this matter instead of just dismissing me as a heretic. So here’s my response. (By the way, pardon me if I’m a bit direct here. I’m not trying to sound edgy, I just have very little time so I’m just getting straight to the point. Thank you for your understanding.) First, regarding works. If you have to accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior or else you will go to hell, what else can that be except salvation by something you are doing? I know all the gymnastics we go through to say that faith is not a work, but I’m still confused at how this kind of faith can be anything other than a work. Isn’t this the very issue that Paul addresses in Galatians 3:1-3 “You crazy Galatians! Did someone put a hex on you? Have you taken leave of your senses? Something crazy has happened, for it’s obvious that you no longer have the crucified Jesus in clear focus in your lives. His sacrifice on the Cross was certainly set before you clearly enough. Let me put this question to you: How did your new life begin? Was it by working your heads off to please God? Or was it by responding to God’s Message to you? Are you going to continue this craziness? For only crazy people would think they could complete by their own efforts what was begun by God.” Saying that Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross wasn’t enough to save us is dangerous stuff. When we add to the cross the necessity of our faith to complete our salvation is doing just what Paul said: “thinking we could complete by our efforts what was begun by God.” I do believe in faith? Absolutely. No one can enter the Another way of saying this doctrine that “we must believe in Jesus to be saved” is that before Jesus went to the cross everyone was dead in sin (or as some say, everyone was going to hell). After the cross everyone is still dead in sin (everyone is still going to hell). So what’s the difference maker? Us! We have to receive Jesus as our Lord and Savior. Again, how can that be anything but a doctrine of works? 2. This dovetails directly into your point about free will. You obviously are from the Armenian persuasion which says that God desires that none should perish (1 Peter) but not all choose God. In other words God doesn’t send people to hell, people choose to go to hell. I know this argument well for I defended it just like you are for nearly 20 years (as opposed to Calvinists who say that only those whom God chooses are saved). Of course I always knew there were holes in my doctrine (as well as Calvinism), but still I felt it was the best answer to what the Bible was saying about faith and works. I’ve since joined the main planks of Armenism (God desires that none should perish) and Calvinism (that God chooses who is saved). I now say that God desires that none should perish which is why he chose all. I believe this is what the Bible has always said but I just couldn’t see it because of my tinted doctrinal glasses. I find that I have immeasurably less Bible conflict to deal with. Again, back to your premise that we all have “free will.” We can’t over look all those passages that say things like: “You did not choose me, I chose you.” “No one comes to me (Jesus) unless the Father draws him.” “While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. The godly for the ungodly.” “But because of his great love for us, God who is rich in mercy made us alive with Christ even where we were dead in transgressions – it is by grace you have been saved.” “Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior. But now he has reconciled you by Christ’s physical body through death to present you holy.” There isn’t much free will in these passages. It seems God just went ahead and made the decision to send Jesus to the cross for our salvation without first getting our permission or asking us if we wanted him to do so. Heck, he went and did it while we were still his enemies. (By the way, don’t overlook that we were enemies with God, God never was never an enemy with us. For God loves his enemies and blesses those who persecute him. He makes the rain to fall on the just and the unjust. He loves everyone. Always has and always will.) So I believe we have limited free will. We have the freedom to reject God, to choose sin, to follow God, to pursue holiness. But we don’t have the freedom to decide whether or not Jesus died for our sins and we don’t have the freedom (or power) to nullify Jesus’ sacrifice on our behalf. If God desires that you don’t perish, then you won’t perish – even if you think for a time that you want to. (By the way, that word “perish” is the same word that is more often translated “lost” in places like Luke 15 with the “lost’ sheep, coin and son.) Furthermore, just how much free will do you and I really have Sue? Did you choose your earthly father? Your mother? Where and when you were born? You body type? Hair color? Personality? Your children? So why is it so crazy to think that maybe we didn’t choose our Heavenly Father; that just as Jesus said, he chose us. 3. Passages that deal with hell. Before I answer your other points about the “hell” passages you mention remember that before we presume that any passage is talking about hell we must first make sure it really is talking about hell. When I actually did a thorough study of these passages (not just taking pastors/teachers word for it) I couldn’t find hell in them. This is how I came to the conclusion that the Bible does not teach a literal, eternal hell. So in each of the passages you site as hell passages I actually see Jesus talking about things that have absolutely nothing to do with hell. (And they actually make a lot more since to me now than before.) For example, I see the Matthew 7 reference you sited (Lord, Lord, did we not prophecy in your name…) is talking about the false prophets who claim to follow God but are actually evil doers who will not enter the kingdom of heaven - which is first and foremost living the life of God here on earth. This is why this passage is located in the Sermon on the Mount where Jesus is talking about his kingdom coming to earth as it is in heaven. Kingdom of heaven does not mean “where I go after I die” and “away from me” is not talking about hell. The Matthew 25 passage you site (the sheep and goats) is again talking about God holding us (actually “nations”/ethnic groups Mt 25:32) accountable for how they have treated the marginalized among them. It is a judgment of works, not faith so it can’t be salvation. Neither is it an “end times” judgment. It is in the context of the fall of 4. Finally, about God’s mercies being extended to people beyond the grave. I am only aware of one passage that we have built the a doctrine around that says God can’t extend his mercies to humans beyond the grave and that is Hebrews 9:27 “…man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment.” (It is interesting that the verse before it says, “But now he (Christ) has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.” Hebrews 9:26) But there are numerous passages that talk about God’s mercies extending beyond the grave. First, there’s the boat load of passages that say things like “His mercies never cease.” Then there are the two I mentioned in 1 Peter 3 & 4. Then there’s Romans 11:25-32 where Paul concludes his lengthy argument explaining how all will be saved by saying things like: “Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Another place is Ephesians 4:8-10 when he says, “This is why it says, ‘When he ascended on high he led captives in his train and gave gifts to men.’ What does ‘he ascended’ mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions? He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens in order to fill all the universe.” Jesus went into “hell” and lead everyone out of there. Why? So that in order that he would fill the whole universe. |