Jesus Saves From What? March 2015 Watchtower Article
Jesus mite save but Peter shilton was better haha.
Yes "perish" would be better since the Greek text literally says it. I showed this to a JW and his answer was "well we don't speak Greek, we're talking about English"
The KJV has (IMO) the best (English) word choice for distilling doctrine. In this case though, you can still use their own bible and prove that CHRIST DOES NOT SAVE US FROM BEING DESTROYED AT ARMAGEDDON (per se) as I showed above.
However, I think they must teach this so as to provide AT LEAST SOMETHING for Jesus to save the average JW from since they cut off their members from the sin-atoning value of the New Covenant.
Christians live in a bubble. They talk esoteric superstitions to each other and filter out all evidence to the contrary.
For anybody who doesn't speak christianese - Perry is salivating at the thought of billions of people who don't share his superstitions, being roasted in hellfire for an eternity.
Perry - Is there a sadomasochistic element to your fantasy?
No Christians wants anyone to go to Hell. That's the point of sharing the Gospel.
Jesus saves from the wrath of his father . . . who sent Jesus to die so that he would not have to kill those who believe in Jesus . . . because his father is a compulsive annihilator like that, who must annihilate unless he can sacrifice his son to himself to give himself a reason not to annihilate.
yogosans: "No Christians wants anyone to go to Hell. That's the point of sharing the Gospel."
A most patronizing thing for one to say. The Inquisitors didn't want to see their victims go to hell either.
We're living in 2015 not in the dark ages. the inquisitions have nothing to do with Christians in 2015.
"We're living in 2015 not in the dark ages. the inquisitions have nothing to do with Christians in 2015."
yogosans, my point is that the foundation of Christianity and the ancient Hebrews, namely the belief in their superiority over other people, leads to wars and genocide. The only difference between fundamentalist Christians of today and fundamentalist Christians of yesteryear is that today's Christians do not have sovereign territory in which to enforce their own prejudice and disdain of others outside their religion. You can thank secularism for that in that it took away the power of religionists and created a religiously neutral society.
You will have tyranny whenever an authoritarian religion takes control of a nation. It is inherent in the psyche of all exclusivist religions that have no respect for others. Such tyranny in any time period is the inevitable result of believing that others are going to go to hell simply for not being like them ('saved').
So you can claim that the past has no bearing on the present but in actuality the past predicts what will happen in the present. Remember the old saying, "Those who forget the past are destined to repeat it". And remember this about this nation's religious founding father's:
The above, the hanging of Mary Dyer by the Puritans, is the natural and inevitable consequence of your religious beliefs.
I was hoping you could clarify a few things for me. I apologise if my questions seem really basic but there's such a wide variety of beliefs within Christianity it's hard to know the position of anyone Christian on any given topic.
You spoke about John 3:18 and belief. Do you believe that "belief" is the metric via which people are saved or condemned? If so, what constitutes belief?
Also, do you think being condemned means hell (like the rich man being burned in Jesus parable about Lazarus)? Or does it mean something else?
Coded logic you are correct. The early church has always taught that those who reject Christ until death will be forever serperated from Gods prescence.