CABL Forum - Re: Loving the Dark

Hey Joe,

I do see your point, for sure.

There are clearly the 2 different ways, "velvet and iron" as you referred to them.

The way I see it each person has to choose which way they will interact with others.

Which one is best? Which way did Jesus predominantly use as his method? Should the method we choose vary dependent on who we are dealing with? If so, how do we determine that?

I don't entirely agree with you about your thoughts on child-rearing as taken from 3 passages in proverbs that call for fathers to strike their sons with a rod. But even if I let that point lie, does that translate to us dealing with people about the message of Jesus? We are not called to correct people are we? Jesus told his disciples that what they had freely received, to freely give, that wasn't a rod of correction was it? It seems to me that it was Jesus consistently, and lovingly showing them the truth... and that was it. I'm not saying you are wrong or calling you down, just presenting another perspective that I believe has validity.

Great info on Hinnom!

Paragraph 2 says a lot to me. A dark and dreary place. Stench? Rot? Societal castoffs? Nothing good? No hope? I think all of these things could apply.

In paragraph 3 Wayne finds that by Jesus' time the people had created an image from this place and identified it with the afterlife. I would say they identified it with David's OT reference to Sheol far more than they did a lake of fire that had not even been mentioned by Jesus or an apostle at that time.

So was Jesus letting everyone in on a place that they did not now for sure existed and calling it what they did, Gehenna? Is it possible Jesus was simply using this place that was already deeply ingrained in the people's everyday life as a metaphor for a place of darkness (spiritually speaking) and separation from God, something that his audience (the Hebrews) would have understood very well from their history of departing from God by their own choices?

If he was speaking of the lake of fire, why liken it to something else that the people would have then become quite confused about? If he was simply using it as symbology and metaphor, how do we know he wasn't using it in the way that I put forward here?

When you throw in the reference about destroying both body and soul you bring up a lot of complex issues. What is the soul? Is it not eternal? If he will destroy the body and the soul what is it that continues into "an eternity of punishment" Simply because he is able to, does not mean that he will.

Your comments about a rod of iron are well understood, I grew up that way, believed that way for far too long unfortunately.

The sacrifice of Jesus, in my faith experience, changes(ed) EVERYTHING. The rod went out. If you look at the OT you find a lot of that rod that you mention because God was dealing directly with man and his sin, nothing in between. Through Jesus he has a different way, there is a mediator, a high priest. God's wrath has been satisfied. "christians" get a kick out of using a big word like propitiation that doesn't mean much to a regular person but if you really look into its meaning you find the real result of his sacrifice. God because of this satisfactory sacrifice has now been able to set aside his righteous and just wrath toward sin and can now work by means of a ministry of reconciliation, his spirit drawing all men (mankind, no slight to women there) to himself.

I understand concern and sounding a warning, that was drilled into my head for years. What do we really know about what we are sounding the warning of though? If it is about a future void of a God who loves us then right on. The rest that we don't really understand or know for sure, hmm?

We know as much for sure about that second when the vapor between this dimension or plane of existence and the next is dissolved as Splicer or Johnmc3. To tell a good story and proclaim a good message that I believe and that speaks of a God with a love that is immeasurable is one thing, that's sharing about my faith journey. To tell a story or proclaim a message that is doom, despair, and death, and raises questions about the God I believe in and say has immeasurable love seems a different thing altogether.

I get your reference on the lake of fire. I guess I could have plenty to say but I have already imposed on people's time too much. sufficed to say, do we understand entirely ow God works in and out of this dimension we call time? Do we have a clear understanding of every statement and allusion made in what is known as John's revelation? I don't know too many people who claim to. Daniel is easier than Revelation and people inside of evangelicalism still argue about that, as well as Revelation.

Last thought, I promise. What do we believe the greatest thing about God or his nature is? What do we continually find ourselves dwelling on about our God day to day? What causes us to cry out, hands raised, bowed to the ground in worship of an awesome and mighty God? What causes a person when they enter into a conversation with us or a time of worship with us to cry out that "God is here, and that is the truth"?

That is the stuff people want to hear about, that is the stuff God wants people to hear. Isn't that what we should be saying??

Just my opinion of course, everyone is on the same road, just maybe a different part of the highway perhaps. I believe we will only get to God through Jesus, I just believe that we will all get to Jesus.

Thanks!

INSTALLATION

CONSTRUCTION / TECH

OFFICE / OTHER

Re: Loving the Dark