What are your views on witchcraft?

Jeni, I want to answer your questions but your messages are so long and there are so many questions I will have to do it a little at a time.My browser doesn't permit me to view your messages at the same time I make mine, so its very difficult to keep up with.I also have other things to do that I cannot put off, so it may take several days to answer you completely.Let's start with hell and Satan.I can very easily believe in the existence of Satan and not believe in hell.What I get from the bible is that the people who are condemned by God after the resurrection and judgement will be put to death forever.Death as in blacked out, non-existent.Most people won't believe me but it is documented that the "hell" doctrine was inserted into religious teachings by Emperor Constantine.If you read the bible very carefully, it does not speak of the literal eternal hell for human-beings.Satan is the enemy of man because after Satan rebelled, man took his place as God's creatures and Satan is jealous of us.Satan and his demons who are spirit can never die and will indeed be thrown in a fiery pit.But God prevented this from happening with man by making him mortal.In case man fails where Satan failed he can and will (if God judges so) be put to death and not given the eternal life that the one's who succeed will get.If you go back to the original language you can see that the word which has been translated into "hell" simply means grave or place of death.Most people will not agree with any of this but that is what I get from the bible.

I'm actually glad you'll be going slow on the respnses because I'm having finals this week and I'm going to be a bit slow too. :-)

"Most people won't believe me but it is documented that the "hell" doctrine was inserted into religious teachings by Emperor Constantine."

Actually, I do believe you, and I did know that already (one of the many reasons I don't believe in the existence of Hell). Based on your reasoning here, am I to assume that you're willing to consider the idea that not everything the Bible says is actually what God meant to say? What I mean is, are you willing to consider that some things might have been either mistranslated from their original Aramaic, Herbrew, and Greek when coming into English, or that some other problem might have caused them to be misunderstood (such as the consept of Hell being inserted by Emperor Constantine)? Since you're telling me you don't believe in Hell because the doctrines proving it were added artificially, I don't see how you can deny the possibility of similar evidence with regard to other classic Christian concepts. Are you willing to at least entertain the idea and let me provide you with reasons and evidence supporting some of my own beliefs?

--Jeni

========== In Reply To ========== Jeni, I want to answer your questions but your messages are so long and there are so many questions I will have to do it a little at a time.My browser doesn't permit me to view your messages at the same time I make mine, so its very difficult to keep up with.I also have other things to do that I cannot put off, so it may take several days to answer you completely.Let's start with hell and Satan.I can very easily believe in the existence of Satan and not believe in hell.What I get from the bible is that the people who are condemned by God after the resurrection and judgement will be put to death forever.Death as in blacked out, non-existent.Most people won't believe me but it is documented that the "hell" doctrine was inserted into religious teachings by Emperor Constantine.If you read the bible very carefully, it does not speak of the literal eternal hell for human-beings.Satan is the enemy of man because after Satan rebelled, man took his place as God's creatures and Satan is jealous of us.Satan and his demons who are spirit can never die and will indeed be thrown in a fiery pit.But God prevented this from happening with man by making him mortal.In case man fails where Satan failed he can and will (if God judges so) be put to death and not given the eternal life that the one's who succeed will get.If you go back to the original language you can see that the word which has been translated into "hell" simply means grave or place of death.Most people will not agree with any of this but that is what I get from the bible.

Jeni, There are many classic Christian concepts that I believe to be false.Two examples I can give you right off are the observations of Christmas and Easter as Christian holidays.It is documented in history that these are actually pagan holidays from long before the birth of Christ.The bible even commands us not to observe them (one place it does this is Jeremiah 10).But do I believe things in the bible to be false?No.I don't believe that any of these things are taught in the bible.I believe that people only think that they are in the bible because they are reading the bible with pre-conceived beliefs in their minds that were taught to them by mankind including the ministers in church.I understand what you mean about assuming.Many is the time when I expressed these beliefs that someone just assumed me to be a Jehovah's Witness, but I'm not. ========== In Reply To ========== I'm actually glad you'll be going slow on the respnses because I'm having finals this week and I'm going to be a bit slow too. :-)

"Most people won't believe me but it is documented that the "hell" doctrine was inserted into religious teachings by Emperor Constantine."

Actually, I do believe you, and I did know that already (one of the many reasons I don't believe in the existence of Hell). Based on your reasoning here, am I to assume that you're willing to consider the idea that not everything the Bible says is actually what God meant to say? What I mean is, are you willing to consider that some things might have been either mistranslated from their original Aramaic, Herbrew, and Greek when coming into English, or that some other problem might have caused them to be misunderstood (such as the consept of Hell being inserted by Emperor Constantine)? Since you're telling me you don't believe in Hell because the doctrines proving it were added artificially, I don't see how you can deny the possibility of similar evidence with regard to other classic Christian concepts. Are you willing to at least entertain the idea and let me provide you with reasons and evidence supporting some of my own beliefs?

--Jeni

before I can answer that...

Jeni, before I can answer your question of am I willing to listen to your reasons and evidence for your beliefs, please understand that I must ask you something.Does any of what you want me to look at contradict the bible?If not I will be more than happy to oblige, but if so I am forbidden to have any part of it. ========== In Reply To ========== I'm actually glad you'll be going slow on the respnses because I'm having finals this week and I'm going to be a bit slow too. :-)

"Most people won't believe me but it is documented that the "hell" doctrine was inserted into religious teachings by Emperor Constantine."

Actually, I do believe you, and I did know that already (one of the many reasons I don't believe in the existence of Hell). Based on your reasoning here, am I to assume that you're willing to consider the idea that not everything the Bible says is actually what God meant to say? What I mean is, are you willing to consider that some things might have been either mistranslated from their original Aramaic, Herbrew, and Greek when coming into English, or that some other problem might have caused them to be misunderstood (such as the consept of Hell being inserted by Emperor Constantine)? Since you're telling me you don't believe in Hell because the doctrines proving it were added artificially, I don't see how you can deny the possibility of similar evidence with regard to other classic Christian concepts. Are you willing to at least entertain the idea and let me provide you with reasons and evidence supporting some of my own beliefs?

--Jeni

That depends on what you mean by "does it contradict the Bible?" Does it contradict the original text of the Bible, the original words written by the desciples who were transcribing God's words? No, it does not; in fact, my evidence comes directly from these original manuscripts, testoring the words the desciples and scribes used. Does it contradict the Bible as most of us know it today in the King James translation? Possibly. But which is more important to uphold, the words King James chose when having the Bible translated into English (and if you've ever tried to translate something from one language to another, you know how hard it is to keep the original meaning in the translated words simply because languages, especially etymologically unrelated languages, don't work the same as each other), or the words the very men who were in direct communication with God used in taking God's word and putting it into human language? In my opinion, the original manuscripts are much closer to being God's true word than the English translations, simply because so much can be honestly lost in translation, let alone the fact that we know King James to have made obvious alterations to scriptures when they aided his personal political aspirations. My worry is that we may be following words that have migrated away from their original meaning either by simply accident of translation or by blatant tampering for personal gain. The closest to God's own voice any of us is going to get is in those crumbling scrolls in ancient Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek. So does my evidence contradict the Bible? Absolutely not. Does it contradict King James' particular vision of the Bible (and those that have come after it)? It may very well. My evidence is presented to show you that what you think the Bible says may not actually be what it says; what you believe to be God's words may have actually been sadly lost (a copy of a copy of a copy always is less distinct and true than the original). I'm not asking that you actually believe what I wish to present to you--you're free to believe whatever you wish for whatever reasons you have. All I ask is the opportunity to show you what I mean, and for you to at least consider the possibility that I might be right. You do not have to agree with me, once you've heard my side, I just ask that you openly listen. God will not despise either of us for attempting to better understand Him, and in the end, you must follow where your soul leads you--I will not lead you "astray" by simply sharing with you my beliefs and my reasons for them.

--Jeni

========== In Reply To ========== Jeni, before I can answer your question of am I willing to listen to your reasons and evidence for your beliefs, please understand that I must ask you something.Does any of what you want me to look at contradict the bible?If not I will be more than happy to oblige, but if so I am forbidden to have any part of it.