Sie sind auf Seite 1von 621

[Mis-translations and mis-


BILL WIESE EXPOSED (23 MINS IN HELL)……………………..…………………..3

ETERNAL TORMENT IS A CHRISTIAN HOAX!!...................................................55
LAZARUS AND THE RICH MAN…………………………………….....…………….143
DO YOU BELIEVE IN A DEVIL??.........................................................................177
LUCIFER THE CHRISTIAN HOAX!................................................................... ..191
GOD THE CREATOR OF EVIL…………………………………………....………….212
THE MYTH OF FREE-WILL EXPOSED………………………………...…..……….234
THE CULT OF ―DO NOT JUDGE‖………………………………………...…….……265
THE SPIRIT, SOUL AND BODY…………………………………………...…...…….279
DOCTRINE OF TRINITY EXPOSED! (updated!!!)………………………...…..……301
WHO IS JESUS CHRIST?.....................................................................................338
JESUS THE ARCHANGEL!! (updated!!!)………………………………………….…377
WAS JESUS AND THE APOSTLES RICH?.........................................................404
BAPTIZM BY FIRE……………………………………………………………….....….417
THE "ANOINTING"………………………………………………………………….….426
THE RAPTURE " Fact Or Fallacy"………………………………………………...…476
IS PETER THE ROCK OF THE CHURCH?.........................................................505
ISRAEL, JEWS AND GENTILES……………………………………………………..510
TITHES VRS GIVING……………………………………………………………….....512
JESUS THE MASTER OF SARCASM……………………………………………....560
TRANSLATIONS OF JOHN 1:1……………………………………………………....572
WINE IN CHRISTENDOM……………………………………………………………..583
WHO WAS MARY MAGDALENE……………………………………………………..602
Welcome to mis-translations and mis-interpretation


This paper is a real mix facts, take time to read the scriptures that comes with it.

Whose report do you believe? The church or Prophet Isaiah?

Was Jesus a handsome man WITH a long hair according to the
church paintings?

According to the Christian Doctrine, Jesus never felt sick is it true?

But what says the Prophet?

Isaiah 53:2--"For He [Jesus-this is a prophecy about the coming Messiah] shall

grow up before Him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry
ground: He [Jesus] has NO form nor comeliness; and when we shall
see Him, there is NO beauty that we should desire Him."

Most people are well aware of the fact that there are no photographs of Jesus.
Neither did Jesus ever sit for an official painting of Himself. So most realize that
these representations of Jesus may not be perfect, but probably they believe that
they are pretty close. At least it is gratifying for them to think He looked like this.

"He has no beauty to attract our eyes, no charm to make us choose

Him" (Isa. 53:2, Moffatt Translation).

Many supposed pictures of Jesus have been painted to portray Him as the most
handsome and perfect example of masculinity (though some feminine traits are
present in most of them) the world has ever seen or known. Many artists are almost
obsessed in portraying Jesus as the most handsome, majestic, and noble man to
have ever lived. But in trying to so honour Him, they rather conspicuously contradict
how the Scriptures describe Him. Jesus had nothing physically appealing that called
attention to Him or made Him desirable to women.

Here's how the Concordant Literal Old Testament translates Isa. 53:2:
"NO shape has He NOR honour when we shall see Him, And NO
appearance NOR loveliness that we will covet [desire] Him."

See what I mean? "Who has believed our [Isaiah's] report?" We just read it,
but will you believe it? God said through Isaiah that the coming Messiah (Jesus the
Christ) would be fragile and have absolutely NO COMELINESS, NO GOOD LOOKS,
that anyone would ever "desire Him."
Has anyone ever noticed Isa.53: 3? "He is despised and rejected of men;
a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief" [Heb: 'choliy,' also defined
as,"malady, disease, and sickness" (Dr. Strong's Hebrew Dictionary). Let's look at a
couple of other translations of Vs. 3:

"A Man of pains and knowing ILLNESS." (Concordant Literal Old


"Man of pains, and familiar with SICKNESS" (Rotherham's

Emphasized Bible).

"A Man of suffering, accustomed to INFIRMITY" (The New American

Bible For Catholics).

"A Man of pain, Who knew what SICKNESS was" (James Moffett

Who said Jesus never felt sick? Ask your Pastors, Apostles, Bishops let them
explain this scripture! Of the 38 times that this Hebrew word 'choliy' and its root
appear in Scripture, 33 times it is translated as "sick, sickness, or disease."

Are you beginning to see something about Jesus you didn't know before? Imagine
that: Not only was Jesus not handsome, but was also familiar with and accustomed
to "sickness and diseases." Let's look at some New Testament proof of Jesus'
sickness and diseases:

And He [Jesus] said unto them [religious leaders and congregation], "Ye ['Ye'
means 'ALL of you'] will surely say unto ME this proverb, Physician
[Jesus is the Great Physician], heal Thyself: whatsoever we have heard
done in Capernaum, do also here in thy country [Jesus healed many in
Capernaum, and now they want to see Jesus HEAL HIMSELF].

"And He said... No prophet is accepted in his own country... many

widows were in Israel in the days of Elijah... But unto none of them
was Elijah sent, save unto Sarepta... a widow. And many lepers...
and none of them was cleansed, saving Naaman... And all they in
the synagogue [the congregation and Church leaders], when they heard
these things, were filled with wrath... and thrust Him out of the city,
and led Him unto the brow of the hill where their city was built, that
they might cast Him down headlong" (Luke. 4:23-28).
Don't think that all sickness and disease is the result of sinning. Or that sickness is
God's way of showing His displeasure towards us. Jesus had not only a one-time
sickness, but was inflicted with sickness much of His life.-That is Isaiah‘s
report, whose report will you believe? The church or Prophet Isaiah?

Timothy was a very loyal follower of Jesus, and he was always sick:
"Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake
and your often [Gk: 'frequent'] infirmities" (I Tim. 5:23).

Another friend of Paul:

"Yet I supposed it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my
brother, and companion in labour, and fellow soldier... ye had heard
that he had been sick. For indeed he was sick nigh unto death: but
God had mercy on him... Because for the work of Christ he was nigh
unto death not regarding his life, to supply your lack of service
toward me" (Phil. 2:25, 27, 30).

Another dedicated member of the church:

―Greet Priscilla and Aquila and the household of
Onesiphorus. Erastus stayed in Corinth, and I left Trophimus sick in
Miletus. Do your best to get here before winter. Eubulus greets you,
and so do Pudens, Linus, Claudia and all the brothers. The Lord be
with your spirit. Grace be with you‖ (2 Timothy 4:20-22)
Ask yourself why Paul could not heal them? Did the bible tell us they were cursed?
Did the bible tell us they have sinned against God? Nope! The bible says no such
thing, they were all natural causes (illness).
One more Scripture to prove that Isaiah's portrayal of Jesus is nothing like the
modern Church representation of Him: Try to square the pictures you have seen of
Jesus with this statement of God's Word:

"Does not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man has long hair,
it is a shame unto him?" (I Cor. 11:14). (―Shame‖ is translated from the
Greek ―atimia,‖ and means, "infamy, indignity, disgraceful, dishonour, reproach,

So now, how many of you will continue not believing Isaiah's report or God's Word?
Will you continue bowing down and paying pious homage to these notorious,
unscriptural representations of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ?
Now that you know the truth on this subject, will you continue to picture Jesus in a
way that the apostle Paul says is a shame: "infamous, indignant, disgraceful,
dishonourable, reproachful, shameful, and vile?" I hope not.
Let me be quick to add, however, that this is how Jesus came in human form as the
humble carpenter from Nazareth. This is decidedly not how He appears today or how
He will appear when He returns to rule the nations of the world as "The Lion of
Judah"(Hos. 5:14), and Conquering King of Kings (Rev. 19:12-16).

Why don't you read this entire paper, and just maybe you will learn a few hundred
things about God, His Word, His Son, the Church, and even yourself that you didn't
know before.

I have not presented God as some alien monster who will torture most of humanity in
a Christian hell of fire for all eternity. No, the Christian theologians have cornered the
market on that doctrine.

Virtually all Christians can quote John 3:16, but how many have ever heard of
I John 4:14 in which John goes beyond those who are "perishing" in
John 3:16? Nowhere in Scripture does death culminate God's love for His
creatures. When Isaiah says, "The righteous perish..." (Isa. 57:1), do they
lose their salvation?

For the time is coming when even those who temporarily perish according
to John 3:16 will be "saved" according to I John 4:14 - "The Father sent
the Son to be the Saviour of the world." God has not restricted Himself with
a timeline to fulfil His purpose to save all humanity.

No power in Heaven or Earth is capable of thwarting God's plan and purpose to bring
the entire human race into the Family of God. Neither the power of Satan and all his
cohorts, nor man with his supposed "free will", can hinder or thwart God's desire
to accomplish His Own will. God's love, wisdom and power are so awesome that it's
frightening, and yet puny men who claim to be representatives of His demean and
relegate God to some alien monster who because He is unable to convert everyone
takes out His frustration by torturing them in real fire for all eternity. How sick can the
carnal mind get?

God will turn sinful humanity to Himself, and His judgments are no small part of that
process. God is quite capable of bringing anyone to repentance in a matter of
seconds - ANYONE, be they Saul/Paul the murderer of God's people, or Adolph
Hitler. Men do not decide on their own, by their own will, to repent and turn to Jesus
as their Saviour (John 6:44). Salvation is the work of God in man (Phil. 2:13;
Rom. 9:16, 11:26; Eph. 1:11; Zech. 8:13; John 1:29; Isa. 55:11).


I can't believe how many times I am asked this question. How is it even possible to
attend Church for a lifetime and not be taught what it is that Jesus saves us from?
Most Christians believe that Jesus came to save us from hell. I reckon from such
unscriptural nonsense that if Jesus just got rid of hell itself, then He wouldn't have to
save us from ANYTHING. Not true. There are many things from which all people
need to be saved, but I assure you that "hell" is not one of them.


 "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made
me free from the law of SIN and DEATH." (Rom. 8:2).

 "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shall call His name
JESUS: for he shall save His people from their SINS" (Matt. 1:21).

 "And He shall redeem [save] Israel from all his

INIQUITIES [Heb.'evil/SIN']" (Psalm 130:8).

 "Who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem [save] us from
all INIQUITY [Gk: 'evil/SIN]" (Titus 2:14).

 "Help us, O God of our salvation, for the glory of Thy name: and
deliver us [deliver means 'save'], and purge away our SINS, for Thy
name's sake" (Psa. 79:9).

 "But God will redeem ['rescue/save] my soul from the power of

the GRAVE [Heb: 'Sheol=Hades, the state of the dead']" (Psalm 49:15).

 "Who delivered us from so great a DEATH, and doth deliver: in

whom we trust that He will yet deliver us" (II Cor. 1:10).

 "I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem
them from DEATH: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be
thy destruction..." (Hosea 13:14).

There is no HELL in all the scriptures quoted above, only king

James will talk about HELL.

There is one more thing that has caused both "sin and death" and the plethora of
other character flaws in humanity. It is mentioned many times in Scripture:

 "So we see that they [the Children of Israel] could not enter in [the
promised land]because of unbelief" (Heb. 3:19).
 "Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart
of unbelief, in departing from the living God" (Heb. 3:12).

 "Afterward He appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat,

and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart,
because they believed not them which had seen Him after He was
risen" (Mark 16:14).

 "Notwithstanding they would not hear, but hardened their

necks, like to the neck of their fathers, that did not believe in the
LORD God" (II Kings 17:14).


The Church teaches that Jesus is only the Potential Saviour of the World, not that
He actually Will save the world. Many orthodox doctrines contradict God's word.

"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be
the Saviour of the world" (I John 4:14).

Does your pastor testify that Jesus Christ will "be the Saviour of the
world" by saving the world? Of course not. The Church teaches that it will never
happen. It teaches that God will rather torture most of His creation endlessly in fire.
And the reason God can't and/or won't save all humanity is because the Church says
God gave to mankind a blessing called "free will/free choice/free moral
agency." They won't tell you that this would then become a god-thwarting power.
Scripture knows nothing of any such god-thwarting power. The Scriptures show (as
does Science), that all human choices are caused by something. And God has
the ability to direct man's steps so that he will eventually choose good over evil.

"For what purpose did Jesus come in the flesh to this earth?" Is He a

"For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost"
(Matt. 18:11).

"The Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to

save them" (Luke 9:56).

"For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was
lost" (Luke 19:10).
"All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned everyone to his
own way; and the LORD hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all"
(Isa. 53:6).

"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God"
(Rom. 3:23).

This is not rocket science: ALL have sinned and ALL are lost. Therefore, Jesus came
to save ALL of the lost sinners.

Jesus said He must "finish" His Father's works (Greek is 'teleioo,' and it means
to, "complete, accomplish, consummate, consecrate, finish, make
perfect" - Strong's Greek Dictionary}.

According to Christendom, will Jesus, complete, accomplish, consummate,

consecrate, finish, and make perfect, all the work which God His Father
commissioned Him to do? They say, no, not ever. But how then could Jesus "...BE
the Saviour of the world" (I John 4:14) by failing to save the majority of
mankind, and even worse by torturing most of mankind in eternal fire? Maybe you
never thought about these things, but you should.

God desires to save all mankind: "God our Saviour, Who will [or desires
to] have all men to be saved" (I Tim. 2:4). The Church degrades this
profound declaration of Almighty God into nothing more than an unattainable weak


Some Theologians and teachers of the word have written me, challenging my paper
on the salvation of all men. They state that this verse does not say God actually will
save all men. They say it is only the "especially of those who believe" that
will be saved. That means Paul should have said: "For therefore we both labour and
suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God Who is the Saviour of all men,
but only of those who believe " This word never carries the meaning of "only."
Intelligent professionals would never allow such idiotic interpretation with any other
book, except the Holy Scriptures.

The Greek word, 'malista' is translated in the New Testament as

"specially/especially." And it means, " to the greatest degree,
particularly, chiefly, most of all, (e-)specially" (Strong's Greek Dictionary).
Here are a few examples of how this word is used in other Scriptures. It always
means something that is "special" in addition to other things:

"For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers,
SPECIALLY ['malista'--'particularly, chiefly] they of the circumcision"
(Titus 1:10). If this verse means the "circumcision only," then there is no
need for the word "specially" to be used at all. It never means "only."

Paul's letter to Philemon: "Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a

brother beloved [speaking of Onesimus] , SPECIALLY to me, but how
much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord?"
[Philemon 1:15].

How could Onesimus be a brother beloved... much more unto THEE, [Philemon]"
if he was a "beloved brother" to Paul ONLY? Onesimus was a beloved brother to
Paul, but he was 'especially/most of all' more of a brother to Philemon than he
was to Paul.

"Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour,
ESPECIALLY ['malista' -to the greatest degree] they who labour in the
word and doctrine" (I Tim. 5:17).

If only they who labour in the word and doctrine are to receive "double
honour," then why would it dogmatically state that "the elders that rule well
be counted worthy of double honour" ALSO? There are two groups being
addressed here, not just one. There is a difference between saying, "I like
dessert, ESPECIALLY ice cream," Or, "I like dessert, but only ice

"The cloke that I left at Troas with Carpus, when you come, bring
with you, and the books, but ESPECIALLY ['malista'--particularly] the
parchments" (II Tim. 4:13) .

When Paul said to "especially" bring the parchments, was he somehow

saying that he didn't want the cloke & books, but just the parchments only?
Nonsense, grow up fellas. unscriptural nonsense!!

And lastly: "As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all
men, ESPECIALLY ['malista'--to the greatest degree] unto them who are
of the household of faith" (Gal. 6:10).
I just love it when God provides us with an exact duplicate of what we are defending
in I Tim. 4:10. Notice the duplication of the phrase "all men" in both I Tim.
4:10 and Gal. 6:10. Is there any possible way to read Gal. 6:10 with the
understanding that we are NOT to "do good unto all men," because it then
says "especially unto them who are of the household of faith?"

Surely no one is so carnal, so prejudiced, so stubborn as to suggest by this Scripture

we are NOT to "to do good unto all men," just because it also says
"especially... the household of faith." Then why oh why do learned teachers
and theologians say that the "all men" before the word "especially" in I Tim.
4:10 are excluded from salvation? That is bogusity!!! NONSENSE!

It matters not that God does not save all in this era. Ultimately, in His time, He will
save all. Man does not set time limits upon God's purpose.

God is willing that all men be saved, and nowhere does He contradict Himself by
willing that some will NOT be saved. "The Lord... is NOT WILLING that ANY
should perish [eternally, as even "the righteous perish" temporarily, Isaiah
57:1], but that all should come to repentance" (II Peter 3:9).

See also Phil. 2:10). It is God's goodness which brings us to repentance.

(Rom. 2:4).

Jesus said: "And I, if I be lifted up [on the cross] from the earth, will draw
ALL MEN UNTO ME" (John 12:32).

Are there any to whom Christ's sacrifice does not apply? "And He is the
propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sin of
the whole world" (I John 2:2).

But the Church teaches that Jesus is only the "potential" Saviour of the world
since there are those whose sins will supposedly never be taken away.

Don't we read in Heb. 10:26, "For if we sin wilfully after that we have
received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more
sacrifice for sins,"? Yes, that's true, but that does not doom that person to an
eternal punishment and torture in some hell. Notice there is a comma (,) at the end
of that verse. Let's read the rest of it: "But a certain fearful looking for of
judgment and FIERY indignation, which shall devour the
adversaries" (Heb. 10:27).

Yes, there are sins that will not be forgiven in this lifetime, but will rather be judged in
the day of God's Judgment upon the whole wicked world. That will not be a happy
time for those who will have their sins judged in that manner, but neither will it be a
pit of eternal torture in fire for no purpose.

"And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commands
all men everywhere to repent. Because He hath appointed a day [no,
not in this Church age, but in the 'appointed day'], in the which He will judge
the world in righteousness by that Man [Jesus] Whom He hath
ordained; whereof He hath given assurance unto all men in that he
hath raised him from the dead" Acts 17:30-31).

Ah yes - God will purify all men, all humanity, " a refiner's fire, and like
fullers' soap" (Mal.3:2). The fires of judgment are spiritual fires that purify and
refine the hearts and spirits of mankind. These fires do not burn and torture men's
physical flesh for all eternity which would accomplish nothing but to make an evil
alien monster out of God. God may be stern, but He is no monster.


God is "the furnace of fire," "the unquenchable fire," "the eonian/age-

abiding fire," "the flaming fire," "the Gehenna [hell?] fire," "the
baptizing fire," "the lamps of fire," and "the lake of fire," and as fire
purifies and refines, so likewise, God "Who makes His angels spirits; His
ministers a flaming fire" (Psalm 104:4).

And why does God make His ministers flames of fire? Because we too are to Judge
the world, and judging involves refining and purifying:

"Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world, and if the
world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest
matters?" (I Cor. 6:2).


God's chosen Few are instructed to be a sacrifice - a living sacrifice:

"I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye

present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God,
which is your reasonable service" (Rom. 12:1).

Does the Bible teach that "fire" is for the wicked and unrepentant sinners

Get ready for another Scriptural shock. God puts all His Believers through fire and
"For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be
salted with salt" (Mark 9:49).
"I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but He that
cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to
bear: He shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit, and with fire"
(Matt. 3:11).

"Whose fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly purge His floor,
and gather His wheat into the garner; but He will burn up the chaff
with unquenchable fire" (Mark 3:12).

Did u get all those scriptures? Don‘t twist the meaning of scriptures for doctrine sake,
it won‘t profit anything.

An "unquenchable" fire is not an eternal or everlasting fire, but rather a fire that is
not quenched. That is, it will be allowed to burn or purify until it's purpose is
accomplished. (See, Jer. 17:27; Ezek. 20:47; Jude 1:7). Although these fires
are called "eternal" or "non-quenched" fires, they are no longer burning today.
They burned out on their own.

James said we should count it all joy when we are severely tried (James 1:2-3),
and Peter said:

"That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold
that perishes, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise
and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ" (I Peter 1:7).

Yes, Jesus paid the penalty for sin in full, yet it remains to take away the sin out of
the sinners. Yes, Jesus is the Saviour of the world, but they don't know it yet.

"The next day John sees Jesus coming unto him, and says, Behold
the Lamb of God, which takes away [Greek aorist--indefinite tense, 'is
tak-ING away'] the sin of the world" (John 1:29).

Yes, Jesus presently " taking away the sin of the world." One sinner at
a time (the "few) in this Church age. It is a process that will continue "...till
He [Jesus] has put all enemies [all sinners] under His feet. The last
enemy that shall be destroyed [Gk: 'abolished'] is death"
(I Cor. 15:25-26). And then and only then will "God be ALL in All" (Vs. 28).

The Day of His judgments upon all the entire wicked world is coming (Isa. 26:9),
when all humanity will be judged; will repent; will bow; will be made righteous; and all
will be saved. This church age is not "the" only day of salvation, but rather "a" day of
"Who then CAN be saved? But Jesus beheld them, and said unto
them, With men this is impossible; but with God ALL THINGS ARE
POSSIBLE"(Matt. 19:25-26).

But isn't every person responsible to seek God on his own? Nonsense:
I could go on like this for a hundred pages, showing you that God is in perfect control
of His entire Creation, and that good will ultimately triumph over all evil, and God will
correct every wrong and convert every soul until He becomes "ALL in All"
(I Cor. 15:28).


"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the
way, that leads to destruction, and many there be which go in
thereat (1. that reason, that time or place): Because strait is the gate,
and narrow is the way, which leads unto life, and few there be that
find it" (Matt 7:13-14).

The King James Version of Matt. 7:13-14 is not completely accurate according to
the New Testament Greek Manuscripts. The phrase "many there be which go
in thereat" should read: "many are those entering through it."
And the phrase "and few there be that find it," should read: "and
few are finding it."

So what's the difference, you ask? The difference is that the words in the King
James translated "go in thereat" and "that find it" are in the Greek aorist
(indefinite--past, present, and future) tense, and therefore need to be
translated "entering through it," and "are finding it." This Greek tense of the
verb shows that this is the present condition of the majority of humanity, not
humanity's ultimate eternal destiny.

Yes NOW, in this present Church age, only the "FEW chosen" are going God's
way that leads to "life." But it is the "MANY called" that are presently following
the path that leads to destruction. It is those who are "perished, lost, and
destroyed," that Jesus came to save.

The phrase, "broad is the way that leads to destruction," is falsely

interpreted by the Church to mean, "broad is the way that leads to eternity
in hell." Well It says no such thing and it means no such thing.

Honestly, does anyone see the words "eternal destruction," or "eternal

hell," or "lost for ever," or "never-ending torture," or "eternal life in
fire" in Jesus' statement? I think not.
There is an ocean of difference between "temporary destruction" for a grand
purpose, and "eternal torture" in some pagan hell for absolutely no redeeming
purpose never seems to enter the minds of Christian theologians.

The church and Christian teachers in general, use a couple of dozen Bible verses to
justify their teaching of an eternal hell of torture and punishment on most of
humanity. Here is just one such example that says no such thing as they contend.
Matt. 7:13 is a favourite verse used to justify their teaching of hell:

"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the
way, that leads to destruction, and many there be which go in
thereat" (Matt. 7:13).

It is the words "broad way" and "destruction" that supposedly support their
eternity for most of humanity in an eternal hell. Let's examine it...
In I Corinthians 5:5 Paul gives instruction regarding a man in the congregation
who was having sexual relations with his father's wife. Paul told them...

"To deliver such one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh..."

Surely these words must mean that this man will be thrown into hell to be destroyed
and tormented by Satan. Oh really? Surely it means no such thing. Seldom are
people told the whole story. It matters not what a verse, or a phrase, or a word may
appear to mean to the unlearned. We must be sure that what we teach corresponds
with and harmonizes with the rest of God's Word. I gave you only the first half of
this verse. Next let's read the second part of this same verse:

"... that the spirit may be SAVED in the day of the Lord Jesus"
(I Cor. 5:5).

Wow! Do your eyes see what my eyes see? Is the ultimate destiny and result of this
man's sin, an eternity of punishment and destruction by Satan in some Christian
hell? If that were true, then how, pray tell, could his "spirit BE SAVED in the
day of the Lord?" Being "destroyed" does by no means equate with
being eternally lost. That is unscriptural nonsense of the Church. Here and in
other places as well, Satan is actually used by God in His plan to save humanity.

I am sure every Christian has read Matt. 4:1:

"Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to
be tempted of THE DEVIL"

God used Satan in one of the greatest trials in His Son's entire life. The difference
between Jesus being tempted of the Devil and we being tempted of the Devil, is that
Jesus couldn't be deceived, where as every one of us mortals have been deceived at
some time by Satan the Devil:
"And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the
Devil, and Satan, which deceives THE WHOLE world..." (Rev. 12:9).

Yes, believe it or not, God uses Satan in His work of salvation for the whole human
race. Have we forgotten how God used Satan to bring about Job's repentance and
restoration to God? The whole world has been deceived by Satan, but the whole
world will be saved by God, in God's time and in God's way.

That God often uses evil to bring about good is attested to over and over again in
the Scriptures. No, not the Scriptures you hear read in Church, but the Scriptures
that are in your Bible, For further proof of this see: Isaiah 45:7; Lam. 3:38; II
Sam. 12:11; Rom.9:19-25; Isaiah 54:16; Jer. 4;6; Jer. 6:19; I Kings
22:22; Psalm 105:25; Jer. 18:11; Rom. 11:32; Josh. 23:15-- Amos 3:6;
Heb. 12:5; Job 26:14; Rev. 12:9; and many more.

Is it possible for a righteous man to perish, be lost, or destroyed, and yet be

saved at a later date? Of course. We are told,

"The righteous perish, and no man lays it to heart: and merciful men
are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away
from the evil to come" (Isa. 57:1).

Surely the "righteous" will not be eternally "perished."

The Greek word "appolumi" has three basic meanings: "lose, perish, or
destroy."Context can tell which of these three is most appropriate; however,
context seldom defines the meaning or definition of a word. Here are a few

LOSE/LOST from "appolumi" - The salt in Matt. 5:13 "lost" its flavour.

The "lost" sheep in the wilderness that wondered from the 99 sheep
was "found" (Luke 15:6). The prodigal Son of Luke 16:24, "...was dead,
and is alive again; he was lost and is found." There is nothing "eternal" in
the use of this word.

PERISH from "appolumi" - The Apostles were afraid they would "perish" in
the sea (Matt. 8:25). Jesus taught in Luke 5:37 that new wine would cause old
wine skins to "perish." In Luke 13:33, Jesus spoke of Himself when He said that
a prophet cannot "perish" outside of Jerusalem. Jesus was that Prophet, that
did "perish" - was crucified and killed IN Jerusalem.

DESTROY/DESTRUCTION from "appolumi" - In Matt. 2:13 Joseph is

warned to take Jesus to Egypt, because Herod wanted to "destroy" Him.
The Pharisees persuaded the Jews to save Barabbas and "destroy" Jesus
(Matt. 27:20). And they later did "destroy"--crucify, kill, Jesus.

In Luke 9:56, Jesus said:

"For the Son of man is not come to destroy [Gk: appolumi--destroy, lose,
perish] men's lives, but to save them."

II Thes. 1:9 is a favourite verse used by teachers and a theologian to try and prove
that God‘s ―destruction‖ on the wicked is eternal. First from the King James:
"Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the
presence of the Lord, and from the glory of His power."

Sort of sounds like this could mean some kind of punishment in some kind of a hell
for all eternity. But not so. Not all translators are honest enough to translate the
Greek word "aionion" properly for the simple reason that it contradicts their
immortal soul, free will, eternal hell doctrines. Here's a few translations that render
this verse correctly:

"Who shall pay a just penalty--aionion--destruction from the Face of

the Lord, and from the glory of His strength" (II Thess. 1:9,
The Emphatic Diaglott), Notice that they leave 'aionion' untranslated. If it
meant "everlasting," they would have translated it thus).

"Who indeed, [a penalty] shall pay - Age-abiding destruction from the

face of the Lord and from the glory of His might".
(Rotherham's Emphasized Bible).

"Who shall suffer justice - destruction age-during -- from the face of

the Lord, and from the glory of His strength".
(Young's Literal Translation).

"Who shall incur the justice of eonian extermination from the face of
the Lord..." (Concordant Literal New Testament).

Not only is everlasting wrongly translated in II Thess. 1:9, but it is wrongly

translated wherever it is found in many modern English Bibles. Furthermore, all such
words and phrases as "for ever," "for ever and ever," "for evermore,"
"everlasting," "eternal," and "eternity" are without an equivalent anywhere
in the entirety of the Bible. If "forever" means eternity, what is "forever AND

If fact (get ready for this one...), no etymologist [study of a word origin] or historian
has ever found a single word which stands for "endless time," anywhere on
earth, before the second century AD, and by then all the Scriptures were written and
The Scriptures use phrases like "no end," when desiring to show endless time.
To show that God will give us "endless or eternal" life, the Scriptures use words
like "incorruption," and "immortality"-death-less-ness, incapable of ever
dying. Anyone given incorruption will never die, and anyone given immortality will
never die. Only in resurrection are we given a life that will never end:

"But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world,

and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in
marriage: Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the
angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the
resurrection" (Luke 20:35-36).

It is in resurrection that we are given "immortality-death-less-ness," not

eternal life. Eonian/age-abiding life has nothing to do with immortality. One has to do
with endless time, while the other has to do with never dying.

God's Judgments are related to ages, not eternities. His Judgments have a
beginning and an ending. The end result of "aionion/eonian/age abiding"
Judgment is righteousness, and salvation (Isaiah 26:9, I Tim. 2:4, etc.)


Now I am fully aware of the fact that it is, "Satan which deceives the whole
world" Rev. 12:9). How is this possible? How can Satan get into God's Church in
order to deceive the masses? Is no one guarding the Spiritual door of the
Church? I'm afraid it is too late to guard the door when we learn from what location
Satan administers his worldwide deception. And from what location is that?

How well I remember when first I read in the Scriptures with my own eyes, exactly
where it is that God identifies the location of Satan's "permanent church-age, in-
house habitation." Satan's "stately seat"--a throne, his "dwelling place."

But where is it? The answer is right there in your Bible, and in red letters if you have
a red letter edition, signifying that these are the very words of our Lord Himself. And
where does Jesus tell us that Satan dwells and has his throne and seat of authority
during this Church age? Here is the answer from the Scriptures:

"And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; 'These things

says He [Jesus] which hath the sharp sword with two edges; I know
thy works, and where you dwell, even where Satan's seat
is [Gk: 'thronos'--stately seat, THRONE']: and you should hold fast My
Name, and have not denied My faith, even in those days wherein
Antipas was My faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where
Satan dwells [Gk; 'to reside, that is, dwell, inhabitant, to house
permanently'] (Rev. 2:12-13).
Wow! The headquarters, dwelling place and throne of Satan the Devil is located IN
THE CHURCH OF GOD. The 2nd and 3rd chapters of Revelation which is
the "revelation and testimony of Jesus Christ" Himself, tells us this.
Revelation is a short history and prophecy of the Church portraying her strengths
and many shortcomings from the time of its writing until the return of Jesus Christ.

The Church is always represented in Scripture as a woman. The carnal and

disobedient Church (the many called) is represented by Agar [Hagar] the
woman in bondage from Sinai and her children which answers to
earthly Jerusalem in Palestine. The spiritual and obedient Church
(the chosen few) is represented by Jerusalem which is above and
free, which is the mother of us all [all the chosen few believers in this
Church age] (Gal. 4:21-31).

Not everyone who professes Jesus will be in the Kingdom of God at Christ's return,
although all will ultimately be saved and reside in the Family of God. Remember how
Jesus repeatedly stated that "MANY are called, but FEW are chosen," that
is now, in this Church age. Right now there are three categories of people with
respect to salvation:

[1] The few chosen,

[2] The many called, and
[3] The many that are not called or chosen at this time in history.

Which category of professing Christians will find themselves outside of the Kingdom
at Christ's return: the few or the many?

Jesus pronounced one "woe" after another on the Jewish rulers (Matt. 23), but
not upon them all. There were a few who were loyal to God and to Jesus.
Nicodemus was a ruler of the Jews, yet he said to Jesus:

"Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher come from God..."

(John 3:1-2, 19:39).

Certainly there are Christians (the "few chosen" of the "many called") who
abhor the unscriptural teaching that God will ultimately fail at saving the world, but
will instead torture most of them for all eternity. Most Christians believe this evil
doctrine through ignorance, but the rulers of Christendom (those who have studied
the Scriptures in the ancient Hebrew and Greek manuscripts) know for a fact that
there is no equivalent to this teaching in the early manuscripts.

Words like: "hell," "hell fire," "eternal," "everlasting punishment," etc.,

have no equivalent in any Hebrew or Greek manuscripts of the Holy Scriptures.
When the concept of endless time is meant in Scripture, it uses phrases
like "...shall have no end" or "be no end" (Psalm 102:27; Isaiah 9:7;
Luke 1:33).

When non-ending life is meant in reference to our spiritual resurrected bodies, the
Scriptures use words like: "incorruption - imperishable," "glorious,"
"spiritual," and "immortality" (I Cor. 15:42-44, 54).

The word "immortality" (Greek, 'athanasia') means "deathlessness--

immortality." It does not mean "eternal" or "everlasting." Immortality will
never end and Immortals will never die. But the word itself does not mean
"everlasting," or "eternal."

So are there "many" professing Christians that will be told to depart from Jesus,
because He never knew them? It's in your Bible just as it is in mine. There is no
other large group of many who can fulfil this prophecy except for the members of

So what is one of these "works of iniquity" for which the "many" are guilty?
Well the very worst damnable heresy of Christendom teaches that God will torture
mercilessly most of the human race in a hellhole of terrorism with real fire for all

But there is a purpose for God allowing people to believe such utter unscriptural filth.
People must come to the realization that they are not nearly as loving, good, and
holy as they may have assumed. Hence the admonition to: "...let him that
thinks he stands take heed lest he fall" (I Cor. 10:3-12).

This prophecy of Jesus in Matt. 7:21-23 is absolutely staggering! At Jesus' return

the many believers in Jesus' name will not enter into God's Kingdom. They will have
to go into God's Judgments. We are warned and admonished of this fact in
numerous places. The prophetic Church is likened to the nation of Israel in the
wilderness. Listen to what Paul teaches regarding this:

"And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same
spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed
them: and that Rock was Christ. But with MANY of them God was
not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness. Now
these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust
after evil things, as they also lusted. Neither be ye idolaters...
Neither let us commit fornication... Neither let us tempt Christ...
Neither murmur ye... Now all these things happened unto them for
examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the
ends of the world are come. Wherefore let him that thinks he stands
take heed lest he fall" (I Cor. 10:3-12).

Bill says Hell is a place of, no water, no life; virtually no air; no sleep, total isolation
from other people; total darkness; billions of helpless people screaming insanely for
mercy; spiders as large as Volkswagens; snakes as big as fright trains; a stench
1000 times worse than any foul odour on earth; 13 foot hideous demons which break
every bone in one's body; demons which tear off people's arms and legs; demons
that smash one's head flat; demons that rip the flesh right off of one's bodies over
and over for all eternity; and all this insane torture takes place at the centre of the
earth in 12,000 degree fire pits [Is Humanity And Demons Not Being
Tormented In Hell? So How Could The Demons Be Breaking Human
Bones In Hell? Is The Christian Hell Future Or Now? These are
unscriptural nonsense, ]

As if to add insult to injury, Mr. Wiese assures us that, "I was also aware that
there were MANY levels, FAR, FAR WORSE." How pray tell could anything
be, "many levels, far, far worse" than Bill describes in his book? His
description is already beyond total insanity, and yet he says there are many levels
far, far worse than such insanities. In fact he says many things in hell are "a
THOUSAND TIMES worse" than anything on earth. (23 Minutes in Hell,
p. 26--CAPS are mine).

Which fictitious writers of horror novels have ever conceived such a deranged
scenario of mind-boggling swill? There is not the slightest hint in all Scripture that
there is such a geographical location where God assigns and subjects most of
humanity to such an eternal destiny of insanity. Bill says: "I believe everyone there is
just on the verge of insanity. However, I believe you never quite go insane, for that
would provide a form of escape. And there is no escape, even mentally."
(23 Minutes in Hell, p. 26)


The book 23 Minutes in Hell is a story by Bill Wiese (a California real estate agent)
who on Monday November 23, 1998, at 3:00 a.m. says he was taken out of his body
by God and found himself "travelling, journeying, and falling" (his words not mine)
3700 miles to the near -centre of the earth into a rock walled prison cell containing
13 foot reptilian like demons with human forms. Bill says that the demons of hell fulfil
their "desires, pleasure, and amusement" (his words not mine) by torturing billions of
people for all eternity. Same old nonsense from our Theologians and Preachers.
One such demon ripped the flesh right off of Bill's body. Bill said his flesh grew back
in 30 seconds, and could be ripped off again and again for all eternity. Bill witnessed
pits of fire with humans writhing with pain and misery, screaming for mercy only to be
pushed back into the fire by demons. He saw spiders as big as Volkswagens, and
snakes as large as locomotives. And to emphasize the fear he experienced in hell,
Bill presents us with a shark attack he says he was personally involved in. - Oh my
God, I will plead with anyone reading this paper to buy the book ―23 minutes in HELL
-by Bill Wiese.‖

Here are some of the fully substantiated figures of language used in Scripture. Many
of these examples can be found in an appendix in the back of The Concordant
Literal New Testament published by Concord Publishing Concern.

We will begin with FIGURES OF LIKENESS which include:

 similes (when something is like, or as something else, it is a simile rather

than a metaphor).
 Metaphors (where one thing is said to actually be something else) as
in, "all life is grass" I Pet. 1:24. A metaphor cannot be literal. When
John says, "...the lake of fire, This IS the second death" (Rev.
20:14), and "...the lake which burns with fire and brimstone:
which IS the second death" (Rev. 21:8), he is speaking in a
 implications (a figure where the statement of likeness is omitted).
 parables (there are many, the shortest one being, "Physician, heal
Thyself" Luke 4:23).
 allegories (as in the two women standing for two covenants,
Gal. 4:22-28).
 visions (as in a sheet let down from heaven, Acts 10:11-16).
 signs (as in the sign of Jonah the prophet, Matt. 12:39).
 types (as in Adam corresponding with Christ, Rom. 5:12-21).
 shadows (as in the law being a shadow of good things to come,
Heb. 10:1).
 examples (as in the tabernacle vessels being examples of what is in
heaven , Heb. 9:23).
 images (as Christ is the image of God, Col. 1:15).
 impersonations or personifications (where things are spoken of
as persons).
 Condescension‘s (as where God takes on human attributes-hands, arm,
eyes, hair, etc.).
 diminutives (as in "little women, heaped with sins" II Tim. 3:6).
There are FIGURES OF ASSOCIATION which include:

 association or metonymy's.
 appellations (as when a quality or office is used instead of a proper name,
as in "Son of Mankind" instead of saying Jesus Christ).
 compound associations (as "the word of the cross" I Cor. 1:18,
which has to do with Christ's shameful and agonizing death).
 near associations (as in a phrase that is partly literal, "Then went out to
Him Jerusalem [that is the people of Jerusalem]", Matt. 3:5).
 retentions (this one is too complicated to explain, but I'll give you an
example, "the tablets of the heart" II Cor. 3:3).
 Circumlocutions or periphrasis: a descriptive phrase in place of a
name in order to emphasize the association. Examples, "the product of
the grapevine [though not named is, wine]" Matt. 26:29, "the city of
David [though not named is, Bethlehem]" Luke 2:11,
 Enigmas, and symbols (where a known object or something else is used
to typify something else, or an intangible quality such as love, power, etc.).

Here are many of the words from the book of Revelation used as SYMBOLS:

candlesticks book of life hails

horses tree of life songs
locusts water of life winepresses
beasts hours grapes
birds days wine
animals months balances
dragons seasons wheat
heads rod of iron barley
horns sickle oil
teeth bow eye salve
tails blades pebbles
eyes swords manna
mouths reap wreaths
wings harvest palm fronds
hair grass whores
feet trees harlots
hands thrones fornications
foreheads garments keys
odors robes doors
books signs temples
gold images synagogues
seals wonders pillars
crowns marks rich
names numbers poor
cities vials blind
nations trumpets naked
kings winds hot
tongues rivers cold
Nicolaitans lakes lukewarm
Antipas seas blood
Armageddon waters deaths
Balaam clouds fire
Balak floods sulphur
Abaddon mountains brimstone
Apollyon islands smoke
Babylon lightning‘s sun
Sodom voices moon
Egypt thunders stars
Jezebel earthquakes

And even heaven and earth are used as symbols in this great book of symbols.

There are also FIGURES OF OMISSION which include:

 omitted nouns (as in "the wicked [people is understood]," "the blind

[people]," "the rich [people]," "the poor [people]," "the twelve [apostles is
omitted but understood]).
 omitted verbs (as in incongruous omissions like, "Milk I give you to drink
not solid food" The omission of "to eat" is understood, as one does not "drink
solid food" I Cor. 3:2).
 Unfinished sentences (the King James usually finishes sentences that
are unfinished in the Greek, such as, "As I swear in My indignation, If
they shall be entering into My rest!" Heb. 3:11).
 Omission or non-sequence (as in "These which you are
beholding___there will be coming days..." Luke 21:6).

I did not take the time to present this basic listing of "figures of speech" from the
Scriptures, just to fill more pages. It is most important to understand that the study of
the Scriptures is not the same as studying a high school or college text book. It is far
different. School text books, as a rule, would not contain even one percent of the
figures of speech that I have presented here.

If we do not have even an elementary understanding of these many and varied

figures of speech, we will hardly be in a position to teach God's Word to others, as
the Bible is literally filled with hundreds of examples of figurative language.

Yet Christians and theologians by the millions tell us that the Bible is literal,
and must be taken literally. As if something that is not literal, is not true.
The many parables of Jesus were not "literally" true, yet their teaching was
absolutely true. A metaphor is true, but it is not "literally" true. There are many
hundreds and of statements in the Scriptures that are true, but they are not
"literally" true.

Did Jesus "literally" go "fishing for men" with rod, reel and hocks (Matt. 4:19)?
Are Christians "literally" "salt" Matt. 5:13? Or are they not just "like" salt in
certain ways? It's a metaphor, not literal.

Did Jesus mean for Christians to "literally" "pluck out your eyes, cut off your
hands, and cut off your feet" if they offend or cause to sin (Mark 9:43-47)?
How many Christians do you know who have no eyes, no hands, and no feet
because they obeyed this command "literally?"

Did Jesus mean that men are "literally" "dogs and pigs" (Matt. 7:6)?
Do false prophets "literally" wear "sheep's clothing" (Matt. 7:15)?
Did Jesus mean that Christians who live righteously are "literally" "trees that
bring forth good fruit" (Matt. 7:18)?

When Jesus said: "...let the dead bury their dead," did He mean that dead
people can "literally" bury other dead people?

Did Jesus mean that Christians are "literally" food produce as we would find in the
produce department of a supermarket, that will one day be "harvested by
laborers" like grain in a field (Matt. 9:37-38)?

Was Israel "literally" "lost sheep" (Matt. 10:6)?

Was Jesus speaking "literally" of animals when He said:

"I send you forth as SHEEP in the midst of WOLVES: be ye therefore

wise as SNAKES, and harmless as DOVES" (Matt. 10:16)?

Did Jesus "literally" mean that the Pharisees were the offspring of SNAKES when He
called them: "O generation of vipers..." (Matt. 12:34)?

Was Jesus "literally" dead in His tomb for "three days and three nights" as He
used as a sign for the Pharisees? How does one get "three days AND three nights to
fit between Good Friday sunset and Easter Sunday morning? That's "literally" only
one day and two nights. The answer is in understanding that the sign of Jonah is
not literal, but is rather a parable also. What is "the heart of the earth?" It does
not stand for His tomb or grave.

Are Gentiles "literally" sub-human "dogs?" Did Jesus "literally" call the woman of
Canaan a "DOG" (Matt. 15:26)? No, of course not. Jesus was merely expressing
to this woman that the Jews looked upon the Gentiles as "dogs." And so Jesus did
feed her with more than "crumbs" and literally did heal her daughter.
Did Jesus warn against using the "leaven" of the Pharisees in their baking
(Matt.16:6)? No, of course not, their "leaven" was their false "doctrine" or
teachings (Matt. 16:12).

Did Jesus tell Peter that the Kingdom of Heaven is "literally" locked up and requires
"literal""keys" to unlock (Matt. 16:19)?

Did Jesus expect His disciples to go through life with a "literal" "cross" on their
backs, or to "literally" all be crucified as He was (Matt. 16:24)?

Did Jesus "literally" speak with dead Moses and Elijah in the company of His
disciples on the mount (Matt.17:3)? No, of course not, it never "literally" happened,
it was "a VISION" (Matt. 17:9). This vision took place in the minds of the
Apostles while they, not Moses and Elijah, were on the mountain.

Did Jesus really say that the Pharisees would "literally" "...strain out a gnat,
and swallow a CAMEL" (Matt. 23:24)? Who could literally swallow a

When Jesus took the unleavened bread at the last supper and said: "Take, eat;
this is My body," did He mean for His disciples to eat "literal" human flesh rather
than bread (Matt. 26:26)? And was the wine "literally" Jesus' "blood"
(Matt. 26:28)? Furthermore, God forbids the drinking of blood in the Bible.
Was Jesus "literally" a "Shepherd" and His followers "literally" "sheep"
(Matt. 26:31)? Jesus was literally a "carpenter," not a "shepherd."

Jesus: "...let this cup pass from Me..." (Matt. 26:39). Is this a literal cup?
Well there are a couple of dozen verses which are figurative language and not literal
at all. The Bible is filled with hundreds and hundreds of just such figures of speech
which are not to be taken literally. They represent spiritual truths, but they are not to
be taken literally as stated.

And so there are dozens of ways that teachers and theologians misrepresent the
Scriptures in order to perpetuate their unscriptural pagan doctrines. With regards to
"hell," I have heard Christian teachers state dozens of times that: "Jesus spoke twice
as much about hell as He did about heaven." That is a bald faced lie.

The truth is that Jesus never once spoke of anything related to the Christian usage
of the English word "hell." And even if we accept the few times that the word "hell" is
attributed to Him, it is only on four occasions that the word "hell" is attributed to

"Capernaum... brought down to hell [Greek: hades/unseen]"

(Matt. 11:23).

"Capernaum... thrust down to hell [Greek: hades/unseen]" (Luke 10:15).

"hell [Greek: hades/unseen] shall not prevail"
(Matt. 16:18).

"And in hell [Greek: hades/unseen] he lifted up his eyes" (Luke 16:23).

"I [Jesus]... have the keys to hell [Greek: hades/unseen]" (Rev. 1:18).

Even if we accept these four occasions where "hell" is attributed to Jesus, that
means that if He spoke twice as much about hell as heaven, then Jesus would have
mentioned "heaven" only two or three times. Truth is, Jesus spoke of heaven one
hundred and thirteen times. Therefore if He spoke twice as much about hell, then
Jesus would have had to discuss hell two hundred and twenty-six times, whereas we
find only five mentions on four occasions. Yet how many Christians have ever
questioned such false statements of theologians? Virtually none, that's how many,
but tens of thousands of Christians get irate at me when I show them the truth.

Continuing with Jonah's experience:

"Then I said, I am cast out of thy sight; yet I will look again toward
thy holy temple. The waters compassed me about, even to the soul:
the depth closed me round about; the weeds were wrapped about
my head. I went down to the bottoms of the mountains; the earth
with her bars was about me for ever: yet hast You brought up my life
from corruption, O LORD my God. When my soul fainted within me I
remembered the LORD: and my prayer came in unto Thee, into Your
holy temple" (Jonah 2:4-7).

"And the LORD spoke unto the fish, and it vomited out Jonah
upon the dry land" (Jonah 2:10).

All's well that ends well. Moral: Don't run away from God.

Now let's be completely honest. Bill says that Jonah literally experienced the same
"Hell" that he experienced (after all, how many Christian "hells" are there?) Okay,
here are some of Bill's fraudulent contradictions:

1. Jonah was swallowed by "a great fish" (the 'fish' had LIFE). So much for Bill's
false assertion that there is "NO LIFE" in Hell (Jonah 1:15). This great fish as well
as Jonah himself were very much alive. In Bill's fancied visit to hell, he was alive;
billions of people were alive; and the demons were all alive, yet he states; "
hell there is no life of any kind. ALL IS DEAD" (23 Minutes, p. 12).
And on page 37 of his book, Bill says, "Your soul cannot die..."
I will love my readers to read my paper on SOUL- BODY AND SPIRIT

2. Jonah and this great fish were "in the sea" (Jonah 1:27),
"For You had cast me into the deep, in the midst of the seas; and
the floods compassed me about: all Your billows and thy
waves passed over me"(Jonah 2:3).
So Jonah was in the sea, in the deep, in the midst of the seas, compassed
with floods, and billows. That's a lot of water for a place Bill says has no water!

3. "...the waters encompassed me" (Jonah 2:5) -MORE water.

4. "...the weeds were wrapped about my head" (Jonah 2:7). But Bill
tells us that there is not even a blade of grass in Hell, nothing green. Yet Jonah
is wrapped in weeds. Aren't most weeds, green?

5. One can go "...down to the bottom of the mountains" in a sea, for many
island mountains terminate at the bottom of the sea. But one cannot go down to
the bottom of the mountains in the centre of the earth. Are there mountains in
the centre of the earth? No. The Concordant Literal Old Testament translates this
phrase as: "I go down to the fashioning points of the mountains..."

6. Bill apparently had no thoughts of God when he went to Hell, whereas Jonah
said, " prayer came in unto Thee, into Your holy temple." And
because Jonah prayed, God heard him and answered him by releasing him from the
horrors of this great fish (that was the will of the father though, Jonas did not prayed

And so the things that Bill tells us are not found in his hell. But we have seen from
the Scriptures, those things described during Jonah's experience with this great fish
in the sea. (Obviously, Jonah was not in Bill's hell, the Christian hell, The Jew's hell,
the Muslim's hell, or any of the other pagan "hells" of the world).

So Bill tells us that Jonah was in the same hell that he was taken to, yet we found
that the things described in Jonah's experience are things that Bill tells us are NOT
found in hell. Next let's examine the things that Bill says ARE found in hell, and see
how many of them are also found in Jonah's experience:

Did Jonah journey to the centre of the earth? No.

Did Jonah experience fire during his time in the great fish? No.
Did Jonah see hideous 13 foot demons while in the fish? No.
Did any creature crush his head, break all his bones, or rip his flesh off? No.
Did Jonah see spiders as big as Volkswagens? No.
Did Jonah see snakes as large as locomotives? No.
Did Jonah see billions and billions of other people being tortured in this fish? No.

Now then, did God tell Jonah to warn Nineveh that they would spend eternity in the
belly of this great fish if they did not repent? No. Why not? Bill says Jonah
experienced the same hell that he did, and that Jesus told Bill that the whole purpose
of his experience in hell was to WARN people to flee from the wrath to come. Was
that not the purpose of Bill and his wife going to such exotic places as New Zealand
and Paris--to warn them of the wrath that awaits them in hell? And let's not forget the
side benefit of selling books.

Maybe Jonah just wasn't the smart business entrepreneur that Bill and his wife are?
What do you think?
I'll tell you what I think: I think that Bill is a deceitful and fraudulent opportunist. Of
course that's just my opinion, based on dozens of Bill's contradictions, and hundreds
of Scriptural references.

Most Christians define hell as a place where Satan, demons, and unrepentant
sinners are forced to live in shameful conditions of horror and pain.

But Bill contends that God has also assigned animals, beasts, and creatures to hell:
both Christians and Bill are wrong. "Immediately I realized that I was not
alone in this cell. I saw two enormous beasts, unlike anything I had
ever seen before" (23 Minutes, p. 2).

So the first category we see in hell before any mentioned of other people, is
the "beasts."

American Heritage Collegiate Dictionary: "beast, n. 1. An animal other than a

human, especially a large four-footed mammal."

"These creatures were approximately ten to thirteen feet tall."

American Heritage Collegiate Dictionary: "creature, n. 1. Something created. A

living being, especially an animal."

Then Bill expects us to believe this nonsense:

"The creatures weren't animals, but they weren't human, either. Each giant beast
resembled a reptile in appearance, but took on human form...I could hear the
creatures speaking...I could understand their words...blasphemous language..." (23
Minutes, p. 2, 3, and 4). "I found myself in the cell, and these 4 creatures were
in the cell with me. I didn't know they were demons at the time..." (From 23 Minutes
Script, p.5).

Bill says he saw thousands of hideous creatures.

Anyone who has even superficially read the Bible but once, knows that God does not
assign beasts and animals to be tortured for all eternity in the fires of some pagan
hell. Where is there a Scripture which supports such utter fantastic nonsense? Why
would God torture animals? Are animals capable of moral sin? Must all animals
confess Jesus Christ as their Saviour or be subject to an eternity of torture in hell?
And if not all animals, why just some? What specific sins did all those bear-sized,
gorilla-sized creatures, rats, worms, spiders, and snakes commit that landed them in
this hellhole of eternal torture?

Why doesn't Bill explain some of these absurdities? Why doesn't he quote the
Scriptures that back such hideous nonsense? Most people are appalled at the
sadistic treatment of women and children by Muslim extremist and terrorists, but
have no trouble believing that Jesus Christ (The Scriptural SAVIOUR of the World)
and God His Father are going to TORTURE most of the world by methods so evil
and insane that would make even these terrorists cringe!

Bill says that our souls cannot die.

"Your soul cannot die, and you are lost and in torment forever" (23 Minutes, p.
37). Is it Scripturally true (or Scientific for that matter) that "souls" cannot die?
First, what is a "soul?" The Bible is very clear on this, albeit, Christian doctrine has
not a clue as to what the human soul is. It is taught that the soul is a third component
that God used in creating Adam-body, spirit, and soul. Not true.

The soul is not a created component of a human. The soul is the sentient person, the
thinking, feeling, and conscious man.

"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul" (Gen. 2:7).

Here then is a literal translation of Gen. 2:7:

"And forming is Yahweh Elohim [GOD] the human of soil from the
ground, and He is blowing into his nostrils the breath of the living,
and becoming is the human a living soul."

And so clearly, man was not given a third component at creation called a soul, but
rather when God blew the breath of life (called a wind or spirit from God) into the
man, then the man himself became a living soul. The word in Hebrew for wind, and
breath, and spirit is ruach. And it is this spirit breath of life that returns to God at
death, not the soul. And the ruach/breath/spirit has no consciousness of its own,
hence when a person dies, "his thoughts perish" (Psalm 146:4).

The spirit, breath of life- ruach, is what gives "life" to the body. There is soul only
when the spirit gives life to the body. The spirit has no soul or sensation or
consciousness of itself, but only when it gives life to the body. When God takes back
His spirit from our bodies, they die and there is no more consciousness until God
resurrects those dead people. Dead bodies have no consciousness, and separated
spirits have no consciousness. Only living bodies made alive by God's spirit, have

And so contradictory to Bill's tall tales and Christian theology, the Bible informs us
that souls can and do die: "The soul [Heb. 'nephesh'] that sins it [the soul, that
particular person] shall DIE" (Ezek. 18:4 & 20).


I would love to explain just what heaven is, but there isn't time in this paper. For now,
just be aware what heaven is not. Heaven is not a geographical location somewhere
on a large planet in outer space with pleasures galore and big rock candy mountains.
And likewise, Satan has angels on the earth:
"...he was cast out into the earth, and his angels [Gk;
'angelos'] were cast out with him" (Rev. 12:7-9).

Although there are many more contradictions from Bill's lectures and books, I will
end with this Contradiction. I will now show you just who the "angels of the
Devil" really are. And if you are an average middle-of-the-road, orthodox, Christian,
then this revelation should knock your socks off and cause your head to spin! This
has got to be one of the most shocking pieces of Biblical revelation that you will ever
hear. Here then is Bill's demonic contradiction:

"God has made mankind the highest form of creation, and these demons are the
lowest form of creation... in Hell, your life is run by demons. These creatures have a
zero IQ, absolute ignorant creatures" (23 Minutes in Hell, Internet Script, p. 8).
Imagine that: Ugly, twisted, reptilian type angels and demons, deceive the entire
world, but having "A ZERO IQ." They apparently have a good time in hell;

1. "Two more creatures came into the cell...I was being sized up and that
my torment would be their amusement" (23 Minutes in Hell, p. 5).

2. "The creatures [demons] seemed to derive pleasure in the pain and

terror they inflicted upon me" (23 Minutes in Hell, p. 6).

3. "Asking for mercy from such evil [demons] only seemed to heighten
their desire to torment me more" (23 Minutes in Hell, p. 7).

On the one hand, Bill says these demons are filled with nothing but hatred, while on
the other hand he tells us that these same demons have amusement in hell; derive
pleasure in hell; and heighten their desires in hell.

Bill tells us that, "The creatures weren't animals, but they weren't human, either"
(23 Minutes in Hell, p. 3). But these demons could speak to each other, "I could hear
the creatures speaking to each other...somehow I could understand their words.
They were awful words--terrible, blasphemous language that spewed from their
mouths..." (p. 4). Imagine that, they weren't human, they have a zero IQ, and yet
they are able to speak in a language? First Bill tells us that these creatures "weren't
animals," but then goes on to tell us that they were animals.

"I was alongside this pit of fire and I saw all these demons all lined up along the
walls, all sizes and shapes of every kind, deformed, ugly creatures, you can
imagine. They were twisted, deformed creatures, huge ones, small ones. There
were giant spiders [he indicated them to be 5 feet tall], rats, snakes, and
worms...There are all kinds of abominable creatures everywhere and they seemed to
be chained to the walls. I wondered 'Why are these things chained to the walls'"

And then Bill makes a giant contradiction (about the size of his spiders). He next tells
us just who these animals are: "I wondered 'Why are these things chained to the
walls.' I didn't understand that, but there's a scripture on that in Jude 6:1 -
"And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their
own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness
for the judgment of the great day" (Internet Script, p. 14). So I was glad they
were chained to the walls... I could see all these demons along the walls..." (Internet
Script, 23 Minutes in Hell p. 8).

So there we have it: According to Bill, the demons in his hell are angels, angels who
sinned, and that Jesus supposedly told Bill that God made hell just for "the Devil
and his angels." So hell was made for the Devil and his angels, but Bill then tells
us that these "angels," are really demons, and that these "demons" are really

But the Greek word translated "angels" is 'angelos,' and means: "an angel,
messenger, or pastor, however, demons and animals are NOT
"angels, messengers, or pastors."

"Oh, what tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!"

No, demons are not angels, and angels are not demons, and there is not one
Scripture to support such a theory.

The "angels of God" (Matt 25:31) and the "angels of the Devil"
(Matt. 25:31) are the same Greek word, #32, 'angelos,' and the definition of this
Greek word is: 'an angel, messenger, or pastor.' (Strong's Greek Dictionary).
Nowhere is this word defined as "a demon."

Although the King James does not use the word "demon(s)," At numerous places in
Scripture the word "daimon"--meaning 'demon' is found. Example, the
word "devils" found in Matt. 8:31 is 'daimon' in the Greek manuscripts. Various
English Versions translate 'daimon' into "demons" rather than "devils." But
"demons/daimons" are never, ever translated "angels." Whoever or whatever
the angels of the Devil are, they assuredly are not invisible or visible huge, ugly,
deformed, alien monsters, which Bill calls "demons," "chained angels," and
"angels of the Devil."

Please notice once more the definition of "angelos"--"an angel, messenger,

or PASTOR" (Dr. Strong's Greek Dictionary #32, 'angelos'). How in the world
could anyone confuse the hideous- looking zero IQ monsters in Bill's book, with
angels, messengers, or pastors. One could possibly get a few back-woods
uneducated aboriginals to worship such creatures, but certainly not hundreds and
hundreds of millions of educated Christians. If Rev. 12:9 is a true statement from
God, then how is it that the two billion Christians in the world are excluded
from "...the whole world" which are deceived by the Devil and his angels?
Only God's innermost dedicated, commandment obeying, spirit converted followers
cannot be deceived:
"For there shall arise false Christ‘s, and false prophets, and shall
show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible,
they shall deceive the very elect" (Matt. 24:24).

The Apostle John calls the Church of Jesus Christ, "the ELECT Lady":
"The elder unto the elect Lady and her children, whom I love in the
truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth"
(II John 1:1).

The "elect lady and her children" are those "few chosen" out of the
"many called."

And these "FEW chosen," cannot be deceived as the "MANY called" are
deceived by "the Devil and his angels, which deceive the whole
world" (Rev. 12:9). The "whole world" cannot be deceived if two billion
Christians (one third of the world's population) are exempt from this prophecy.
Jesus plainly tells us that His Church is composed of two different categories of
people. Here are His words:

"So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called,
but few chosen"
"For many are called, but few are chosen" (Matt. 22:14 &
Matt. 20:16) .

It is absurd to suggest that two billion people--one third of the world's population,
constitute those whom Jesus addresses as the "FEW chosen." Two billion are
MANY, not a few.

Or try this: If two billion Christians represent just the "few chosen" elect of God,
then who pray tell represents the "many called" of God who are not chosen? Has
God called ("called" is from the Greek meaning: "invited to be a saint") all of
the non-Christian nations such as China and Russia to be "saints?" I think not.
Well then, just where are we to find additional billions of people whom God has
called, but who have not been chosen?

Billions and billions of people down through the centuries never even heard of Jesus
Christ, so how could they have been "called" to be saints of Jesus Christ? God's
word forces us to go with the facts or we will be among those who "despise the Word
of God."

Satan deceives the world (except for the "few chosen ELECT" of God) through
his own ministers. The Devil's angels are the Devil's ministers, and they are mortal
men, not hideous, animalistic, monsters called demons. The "children of the
lady" are the "very elect, few," and Satan the Devil has his "children" as
well: "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye
will do" (John 8:44).

Now go back to verse 13 and notice who it was that followed Jesus and to whom it
was that Jesus addressed: "The Pharisees therefore said unto him, You
bear record of yourself; your record is not true."

And remember that the Pharisees were the religious leaders of God's church in
Judea. But they were not godly men or godly ministers of Jesus, but rather they
were the children of their father the Devil. These religious leaders were and still
are, "the angels of the Devil" —the "ministers of Satan" (Matt. 25:41
& II Cor. 11:14-15).

Jesus calls these leaders of the Church, "angels of the Devil," "the children
of their father the Devil." The Apostle Paul calls them "Satan's ministers."

"For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming

themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan
himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great
thing if his ministers also be transformed as the MINISTERS OF
RIGHTEOUSNESS; whose end shall be according to their works"
(II Cor. 11:15).

So who are you going to believe? Bill Wiese with his hideous, alien, zero IQ
monsters, or the Word of God? "The angels of the Devil" are humans, mortals,
church leaders:

[1] Jesus calls the Scribes and Pharisees, "...the children of your father the
Devil" (John 8:44). The Devil's children are mortal men, not spirit demons.

[2] Both the Hebrew 'malak" ("angels" see Psalm 104:4), and the Greek
"angelos" ("angels" see Matt. 25:31) are used in reference to mortal men. The
"messengers" in Joshua 6:24 and Luke 7:24, are men, not spirit demons.

[3] Paul said regarding himself and Timothy, "...approving ourselves as

the ministers [Gk: 'huperetes'] (II Cor. 6:2), and Paul warns
against "Satan's ministers [Gk: 'huperetes'] (II Cor. 11:15). Both are mortal
men, not demons.

[4] The Apostle Paul turned the adulterer in I Cor. 5:5 over to Satan for the
destruction of his flesh so that his spirit could be saved in "the day of the Lord."
Satan was commissioned to deal with this mortal man, not a spirit demon.

[5] When desiring to test Job to the maximum, God Himself chose Satan to be in
charge of Job, who was a mortal man, not a spirit demon.
[6] Although Satan is "...the prince of the demons" they present little
challenge to Satan (Matt. 9:34 & 12:24). Here is another occasion where the
Lord positions Satan to be the adversary to resist Joshua, the high priest:

"And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the

angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist
him" (Zechariah 3:1).

Satan is nowhere sent to resist a demon, only mortal men, not spirit demons.
Jesus cast out many daimonions/demons (Mark 1:34), but Jesus never cast
out Satan's ministers or Satan's "angalos/angels/messengers." Satan's work
is to deceive educated leaders in God's Church--mortal men, not spirit demons.

In Acts 13:10, Paul accuses Bar-Jesus (a Jewish false prophet, Verse 6) of

being " child of the Devil, you enemy of all righteousness..."

Those accused of being children of the Devil are always mortal men, not spirit

Jesus accused the religious Scribes and Pharisees of having "the Devil for a
father," but never is Satan said to be the father of spirit demons.

"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? [Greek 'diamonion'
- demons] and in thy name done many wonderful works?" (Matt. 7:22).

Notice that these Christian leaders do many things "in the Name" of Jesus Christ.
Such as prophesying, casting out demons, and many other wonderful works. Where
are "angelos = angels and messengers" cast out in the Name of Jesus
Christ? Not anywhere, because these "many" doing these things in Jesus' name
are mortal men themselves, not spirit demons.

It's time you are freed from this gross religious deception. There is only one group of
people on the face of the earth who ("...prophesy, cast out demons, and do
many wonderful works in the Name of Jesus"), and they are the leaders
of the Christian Church. The "many" can't be a small satanic cult leader, or a few
bad ministers, or the Russians, the Chinese, the Africans, the pagans, the heathen,
a half dozen weird cult leaders, or the Hindus, the Muslims, the Communists, or
maybe you think it is the atheists who do all these "many wonderful works in
the Name of Jesus Christ? Let's take off the blinders and see who
these "angels of the Devil" really are:
You are now looking at cartoon/caricatures of the
"angels of the Devil." There are millions of them, and
like Bill Wiese, they have been "deceiving the whole world."

God calls them: Priests, Pastors, Prophets, Apostles, Shepherds,

Watchmen, Teachers, Evangelists, & Ministers, but collectively they
are the "angels & ministers" of Satan.

PLEASE NOTE: I am not saying that all Christian Ministers are the Devil's Angels,
but those that are the Devil's angels are ministers and leaders in the Christian
Church. There is no other group that can be called "many" which do "many
wonderful works in the Name of Jesus" except teachers and ministers in
the Christian Church. It is impossible to even conceive of a single non-Christian who
would do "many wonderful works," and do them "in the Name of
Jesus." So where would one find "MANY" non-Christians who do "many
wonderful works" in the "Name of Jesus?"

I will not use real photos of real Christian leaders, as it is not my responsibility to
judge any specific Church leaders. But we are admonished: " sound
doctrine both to exhort and to convince [expose] the gainsayers [those
who contradict sound doctrine]" And so, I am exposing this unscriptural and evil
Christian doctrine of an eternal hell and those who teach it.

No Christian who has studied the Scriptures and been gifted with even a meagre
understanding, should be blown away by this revelation regarding the deception of
Church leaders. God has always held His church leaders and spiritual guides
responsible for the failures in the Church and in the nation. It is shocking when one
first reads of God's condemnation of the leaders in His Church.

Here is a plethora of Scriptural proof where God lays the blame for His sheep, His
people, His Church, going astray in the past, presently, and in the future:


"My people hath been lost sheep: their SHEPHERDS have caused
them to go astray, they have turned them" (Jer. 50:6).
"Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my
pasture! says the LORD. Therefore thus says the LORD God of Israel
against the pastors that feed my people; Ye have scattered my
flock, and driven them away, and have not visited them: behold, I
will visit upon you the evil of your doings, says the LORD"
(Jer. 23:1-2).

Are the prophet's words of condemnation, ancient history only? The Shepherds of
God's Church (the ministers & pastors) have always lead the flock astray.

"Son of man, prophesy against the SHEPHERDS of Israel, prophesy,

and say unto them... Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed
themselves! Should not the SHEPHERDS feed the flocks?"
(Ezek. 34:2).

"As I live, says the Lord GOD, surely because My flock became a
prey, and My flock became meat to every beast of the field, because
there was no shepherd, neither did My shepherds search for my
flock, but the SHEPHERDS fed themselves, and fed not my flock;
Thus says the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against the shepherds; and I
will require My flock at their hand, and cause them to cease from
feeding the flock; neither shall the shepherds feed themselves
anymore; for I will deliver My flock from their mouth, that they may
not be meat for them" (Ezek. 34:8-10).

This is not just ancient history of Israel, but this is also prophecy for us today and the
future. There is only one major difference between the shepherds of the past and the
shepherds over the Church today, that is, it has gotten worse.

"Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they
are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own
way, every one for his gain, from his quarter" (Isaiah 56:11).

That sounds like the ministers and clerics of the "Prosperity Gospel" in today's
mega churches, doesn't it?

"Howl, ye shepherds, and cry; and wallow yourselves in the ashes

ye principal [Heb: 'illustrious leaders'] of the flock: for the days of your
slaughter and of your dispersions are accomplished; and ye shall fall
like a pleasant vessel. And the shepherds shall have no way to flee,
nor the principal [illustrious leaders] of the flock to escape"
(Jer. 25:34-35).

Can one even imagine what it would be like to be a spiritual Shepherd over one of
God's congregations, and have Him speak like this to YOU!? Of course, most of the
modern "Shepherds" of God's sheep don't even know that these Scriptures are
condemning them. Modern ministers of the Church think that all these Scriptures are
nothing but ancient history and do not apply to them at all.


"Then the LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in My
Name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither
spoke unto them: they prophesy unto you a false vision and
divination, and a thing of naught, and the deceit of their
heart" (Jeremiah 14:14 & 23:26).

There are many Scriptures in the Bible about false prophets. For now, however I
wish to discuss only relatively modern false prophets in the church.

Every time I heard one of these self-appointed TV preachers telling everyone what
God "spoke to my heart." They are always telling us of a two-way conversation they
recently had with the Lord. "The Lord told me this and that..." "The Lord said thus
and such..." "I asked the Lord what He will do, and He told me this..." "The Lord told
me to tell the people that a great work is coming." "The Lord is so sad because funds
are down and people have stopped tithing." "God said we are on the verge of a really
great spiritual revival." So 30 day fasting to receive a triple anointing, a whole lot of

But here is what God really says, but these charlatans can't hear God:
I sent them not, nor commanded them at all, says the LORD"
(Jer. 23:30-32).

"I have heard what the prophets said, that prophesy in My Name,
saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed. How long shall this be in
the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? yea, they are prophets
of the deceit of their own heart" (Jer. 23:25-26).

PROPHET PETER WALDO: Founder of the Waldensians, of the late 12th century,
Peter Waldo who was not permitted to preach by the Archbishop of Lyons, seeing
that he was not ordained. In 1214 Pope Innocent denounced the Waldensians as
heretics. Peter taught that the Pope is "the Antichrist," and "the man of sin," which
would usher in the return of Jesus and the end of the world. I was taught that Peter
Waldo was one of the great defenders of the faith.
His prophecies were false, however, as they never happened.

PROPHETS MARTIN LUTHER, JOHN CALVIN, and others, all took their turn in
declaring the residing Pope as the Antichrist which would usher in the return of
Christ and the end of the world. They are all false prophets--it never happened.
PROPHET WILLIAM MILLER: Miller was a Freemason Baptist minister from
Pittsfield, Massachusetts who prophesied that Jesus would return on October 22,
1944. He did not. Miller's loyal followers became known as The Seventh Day

JEHOVAH'S WITNESS PROPHETS: it‘s a bit more complicated issue, I don‘t want
to get in there, but read (The Watchtower October 15, 1980, page 31).
The year 1975 and 1914 plays a major role in the doctrine of the Jehovah witnesses.
"(Awake! magazine, October 8, 1966, page 19).

PROPHET ARMSTRONG: Herbert W. Armstrong of Worldwide Church of God fame

also prophesied that Jesus would return in 1975 (See booklet: 1975 In Prophecy by
Herbert W. Armstrong). I have a copy in my files. Looks like the JW's and Herbert
were wrong on this date--Jesus did not return. As 1975 approached, Dr. Rod
Meredith suggested that maybe they shouldn't put too much emphasis on that date,
as it then looked like it wasn't going to happen. Later the Church made one more
attempt by placing Christ's return in the 90's. I believe they have since concluded
that they are not very good at setting dates.

PROPHET JACK VAN IMPE: "Judgment is about to fall for all of the 'rottenness' that
runs rampant in our beloved land. If it does not commence in 1976, I have no doubt
that unbelievable calamities will occur before 1980." (What In The World Is
Happening?" pp. 29-36). It didn't happen. He later suggested that the planets
would align themselves in a certain way and all hell would break out in 1982. It didn't
happen. He then said the world would run out of food by 1984. It didn't happen.
(underline is mine).

PROPHET HAL LINDSEY: "The Bible fortells [sic] the signs that precede
Armageddon" and "We are the generation that will see the end times ... and the
return of Jesus" ("The 1980's: Countdown To Armageddon," 1981. Back
Cover of paperback edition).
And like Van Impe, Hal Lindsey has Armageddon taking place sometime in the
1990's. It didn't happen. FALSE PROPHETS!!

PROPHET PAT ROBERTSON: "During the fifth year, in 1982, Russia strikes Israel,
is defeated, and for seven years Israel makes symbolic offerings by fire of Russian
war material. These seven years are a transition period for Israel and the world. On
the eighth year, there begins a new era -- a new beginning -- for Israel and for the
world" (Pat Robertson's Perspective," A special report to members of
the 700 Club, February/March 1980. pp. 3 & 5). It hasn't happened.

In the October, 1980, issue of Presbyterian Survey, we find this headline,

"Doomsday Tomorrow? Two Leaders Predict It." Those two leaders are Hal
Lindsey and Pat Robinson. From the Religious News Service out of New York,
we read: "Pat Robertson, the TV evangelist, maintains that the Common Market of
Western Europe is the beast with seven heads and 10 horns referred to in the Book
of Revelation, and that 'the anti-Christ' will emerge from it." They continue on, "If his
dating is 'even close,' Robertson said, 'then we must conclude that there is a man
alive today, approximately 27 years old, who is now being groomed to be the Satanic

"According to Lindsey, the last seven years of history are beginning and 'will
culminate with the worst war the world has ever seen, and the Messiah Jesus will
come back and stop it and bring about world peace.' That would be the 'millennium,'
a thousand year reign by Christ spoken of in Revelation" (The Presbyterian Survey,
October, 1980, p. 32). (Underline is mine). Need I remind anyone that their "last
seven years of history" began in 1980, and it is now 2010?!

PROPHET BENNY HINN: The Spirit tells me - Fidel Castro will die - in the
90's. Oooh my! Some will try to kill him and they will not succeed. But there will
come a change in his physical health, and he will not stay in power, and Cuba will be
visited of God." (Benny Hinn, Orlando Christian Center, Dec. 31st,
"The Lord also tells me to tell you in the mid 90's, about '94-'95, no later than
that, God will destroy the homosexual community of America. [audience
applauds] But He will not destroy it - with what many minds have thought Him to be,
He will destroy it with fire. And many will turn and be saved, and many will rebel and
be destroyed." (Benny Hinn, Orlando Christian Center, Dec. 31st, 1989).

Comment: Don't you find it interesting that the Lord knew for sure that Fidel Castro
would die in the 90's but wasn't sure of the exact year? Also that the Lord told Benny
that God would destroy the homosexual community of America, "about '94-'95)?

―I believe, that Jesus, God's Son, is about to appear physically, in meetings and to
believers around the world, to wake us up!...Paul and Jan are coming to Nairobi with
me, but Paul, we may very well come back with footage of Jesus on the
platform!...Paul do you remember when I came on TBN years ago and showed you a
clip of the Lord appearing in our church in Orlando, on the balcony on the wall?
Yeah. You, you remember that? [Paul Crouch] Very well, I saw it!‖ NONSENSE!

[Benny Hinn]... The Lord has done this in the past, but He is about to do it again,
now hear this, I am prophesying this! Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is about to
appear physically in some churches, and some meetings, and to many of His people,
for one reason - to tell you He is about to show up. You have held back from the
Lord in the past, don't you dare do it now. The day will come you'll stand before Him
and give an answer. How dare we not give to God. How dare we hold back." By
holding back, Benny means holding back from giving lots of money to their
ministries. (Benny Hinn, TBN Praise-a-thon, April 2nd, 2000).

I won't take the time to comment on the dozens of other popular false prophets.
"That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not
hear the law of the LORD: Which say to the seers, See not; and to
the prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us
smooth things, prophesy deceits: Get you out of the way, turn aside
out of the path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before
us. Wherefore thus says the Holy One of Israel, Because ye despise
this word, and trust in oppression and perverseness, and stay
thereon: Therefore this iniquity shall be to you as a breach ready to
fall, swelling out in a high wall, whose breaking cometh suddenly at
an instant" (Isaiah 30:9-13).

Here's what God says through His inspired Prophet, Jeremiah:

"I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spoke
unto them: they prophesy... the deceit of their heart.
Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, says the LORD, that
steal My words...I am against the prophets, says the LORD, that use
their tongues, and say, He says. Behold, I am against them that
prophesy false dreams, says the LORD, and do tell them, and cause
My people to err by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them
not, nor commanded them: therefore they shall not profit this people
at all, says the LORD" (Jer. 23:30-32).

Well if God did not send these lying prophets, who did? Whose Prophets are
they? They are the ministers of Satan who present themselves as "ministers of
righteousness" (II Cor. 11:15). Here's what Jesus said about false prophets:

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing,

but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Not every one that says unto Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the
kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of My Father which is
in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we
not prophesied in Thy Name...And then will I profess unto them, I
never knew you: depart from Me, ye that work iniquity."
(Matt. 7:15, 21-23).

And certainly not all the clergy of Christendom are pawns of Satan, but many of them
are. Let's get real for a moment, shall we? A few verses before Jesus berates
the "many" for their "iniquity" in Matt. 7:17-21, He warns us in vs.15 to:
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing,
but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

Excuse me, but did I not read Jesus' warning correctly? Did Jesus say: "Beware of
false prophets, which come to you IN WOLVE'S CLOTHING, but
inwardly they are gentle sheep"? Is that what some of you think Jesus said?

"The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their
means; and my people love to have it so" (Jer. 5:31).

True words were never spoken: Show the people how they are being ripped off
physically, spiritually, and financially, and more often than not, they will hate you for
it. They don't want their ministers (their shepherds, pastors, and prophets) to be
honest with them. They want to hear "smooth things," and "deceit," but they
do not want to hear Isaiah's report to the nation. All too many "despise this
word" of Isaiah. They don't want to hear that:

"When Thy judgments are in the earth, THE INHABITANTS OF THE

WORLD will learn righteousness" (Isa. 26:9).

They would rather hear that there is an eternal hell of torture awaiting those who
have not had opportunity to be converted in this lifetime.

There have always been false prophets in God's Church, and they will continue to be
there until the end.

"But there were false prophets also among the people, even as
there shall be false teachers among you, who privately shall bring in
damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and
bring upon themselves swift destruction" (II Pet. 2:1).

False prophets are not just something from the past that are found in the Church of
God. They are here today in greater numbers than ever:

"But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving,
and being deceived" (II Tim. 3:13).

And just who are these "seducers" of which Paul spoke? They are, of course,
the "false prophets" of which Jesus spoke:

"For false Christ‘s and false prophets shall rise, and shall show
signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the
elect" (Mark 13:22).

"And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom

the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness
shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose
judgment now of a long time lingers not, and their damnation
slumbers not" (II Peter 2:2).

And as I have already stated the only difference in the false prophets of the past and
those of the present is that they were prophesied to GET WORSE! And just how
many are there that "...shall follow their pernicious ways...?" BILLION and
counting, that's how many!

"And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the
LORD'S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and
shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
"And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the
mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and He will
teach us of His ways, and we will walk in His paths: for out of Zion
shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
And the loftiness of man shall be bowed down, and the haughtiness
of men shall be made low: and the LORD alone shall be exalted in
that day. And the idols he shall utterly abolish" (Isaiah 2:2-3, 17-18).

Isaiah makes it sound like nearly everyone from every nation is in need of learning
about the Lord and His laws. What about the two billion self-professed Christians?
And by the time this prophecy takes place on earth, there will be many more
Christians than the present two billion. It's time we learned and understood that the
basic doctrines of Christendom are not Scriptural.

"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 [Gk:

"And MANY false prophets shall rise, and shall DECEIVE MANY. For
there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show
great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible [Thank
God that it is not possible...] they shall deceive the very elect"
(Matt. 24:3, 11, & 24).

"And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man
deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ;
and shall deceive many" (Matt. 24:4-5).

I marvel that theologians teach that many people will come saying that "they are
the Christ," No, Jesus did not say that many would come claiming that they,
themselves, are Christ, but rather that He (Christ) is the Christ. Now then, who but
Christians teach that Jesus Christ IS THE CHRIST of God? No one, but Christians
only. So those who "deceive many" are Christians!

About every ten or twenty years a person will come along and claim that he, himself,
is Jesus Christ, the Son of God. And so, it is not the "many" who do this, but rather
only an occasional one every so many decades. And, no one of normal intelligence
(certainly not "the many") would ever really believe that these weirdos really are
Jesus Christ. So these rare few are not themselves the "many" nor do they deceive
the "many."

It's not the Muslims who teach that Jesus is the Christ. It's not the Hindus who teach
that Jesus is the Christ. It is not the heathens or the pagans that teach that Jesus is
the Christ. And certainly the atheists do not teach the Jesus is the Christ. You know
who they are--they are the pastors, ministers, teachers, prophets, priests,
shepherds, and theologians of Christendom. They are "many," and Jesus said they
would be deceiving "many." There is no other category of people on earth whose
number is "many," who claim to represent Christ, and teach that Christ is the
Christ, yet are deceiving "many."

If you really think that the leaders of the Christian Church are not these "many
false prophets," who are "deceiving many," then you have to account for
them with some other large group that does this, or you make Christ and the
Scriptures out to be lying.

It does you no earthly good to get angry with me for bringing this message. Peter
said it correctly when he warned that God's "... way of truth shall be evil
spoken of" (II Pet.2:2).

Those two Jehovah's Witness ministers at my door got angry with what I said, even
though what I said was right there in their own Bibles. I have found that there is
nothing more impenetrable than a closed mind. Here's what the apostle John has
admonished us to do:

"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they
are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the
world" (I John 4:1).

And just how are we to "try the spirits?" Here's how:

"To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according
to THIS WORD, it is because there is no light in them" (Isa. 8:20).

Amazing how we keep coming back to "Isaiah's report," isn't it?

And for sure, the vast majority of Christians and virtually all orthodox Christians (and
of course, their leaders and teachers), "...speak NOT according to this
word." You can't find the doctrines of the Christian Church in the Scriptures. I have
challenged anyone for many years to prove any major orthodox Christian doctrine
from God's Word--the Holy Scriptures. Oh don't get me wrong, show any Christian
any Scripture and he will SAY that he believes it. But getting him to show you any
Christian doctrines from the Scriptures, and he can't.


God has "ministers."

"But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God..."
(II Cor. 6:4).

Satan also has "ministers."

"Therefore it is no great thing if his [Satan's] ministers..."
(II Cor. 11:15).

"Ministers" in both verses are translated from the Greek word 'diakonos,' which
means: "Specifically a Christian teacher or pastor (technically, a deacon or
deaconess)-- deacon, minister, servant." (#1249, Strong's Greek Dictionary).

Hang on to your hat--let me restate that again, as many of you missed it:
A minister of God (II Cor. 6:4) is: "Specifically, a Christian teacher or
A minister of Satan (II Cor.11:15) is: "Specifically, a Christian teacher or

It's the same word. It matters not to whom it is applied, the word 'diakonos' has the
same meaning. Satan has "diakonos" for his servants and ministers, and his
ministers are "Christian teachers and pastors." They ARE "wolves in
sheep's clothing," and they ARE "deceiving many." Yes, they do "many
wonderful works" in the name of Jesus Christ, but that doesn't make them God's

If doing many wonderful works made them ministers of Jesus Christ, He would never
have said: "...depart from Me, ye that work iniquity" (Matt. 7:23). One
day this whole Christian charade will be exposed for the whole world to see.

"Mystery Babylon" will no longer be a mystery to anyone. "For nothing is

secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither anything hid, that
shall not be known and come abroad" (Luke 8:17). Satan's ministers will
be exposed. Paul shows us an allegory concerning the Church down through the
"For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a
bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who is of the
bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was
by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two
covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which genders to
bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and
answers to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her
children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother
of us all" (Gal. 4:44-26).

In Scripture, the Church is likened to a woman. Jerusalem that is in bondage and

Jerusalem that is from above which is free. The faction of the Church in bondage is a
woman who rides a beast:

"And the angel said unto me, Wherefore did you marvel? I will tell
you the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carries
her..." (Rev. 17:7).

"And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and
lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her and lament for her, when
they shall see the smoke of her burning" (Rev. 18:9).

Mystery Babylon is that portion of the Church which has the ministers of Satan as
their teachers and pastors. And those whom God is calling to repentance and
obedience to Him are admonished to come out of that system:

"And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, 'Come out of her My
people, that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive
not of her plagues" (Rev. 18:4).

God's "people" are warned to "come out of" Mystery Babylon the Great. Unless they
come out of physical, carnal Jerusalem, they cannot enter into "Jerusalem which is
above" which is free, and which is "the mother of us all."


"And no marvel; for Satan HIMSELF is transformed into an AN

ANGEL OF LIGHT. Therefore it is no great thing if HIS MINISTERS
also be transformed as the MINISTERS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS; whose
end shall be according to their works" (II Cor. 11:14-15).

No, Satan is not transformed into a devil in a red suit, with a tail and a pitchfork.
Nor are Satan's ministers transformed into hideously ugly and deformed demons.
Satan presents himself to the world as an "Angel of light," and his ministers are
seen (yes, Satan's angels can be seen, but not his demons) as "Ministers
of righteousness."

What was Christ's attitude toward the Scribes & Pharisees--the religious leaders of
His day? This is shocking, but then again, "Who will believe our report?"
The dominant authority in the Church beside the Priests, were the Pharisees.

In John 8:3 Jesus begins dealing with the Scribes and Pharisees along with many
Jews from the city. Who were these leaders called "the Scribes and

The Pharisees were not the priests, but rather people from all walks of life who were
very pious and strict keepers of the Law of Moses. They constantly adjusted the Law
to fit the changing world according to their traditions and own desires. The more
educated of the Pharisees were the Scribes and the rulers of the Jews. Here's a brief
historical description of the Scribes and Pharisees:

"In the modern sense they [the Scribes] were the religious scholars or theologians ...
sometimes called lawyers ... or teachers of the law ...could make judicial
decisions based on Scriptural exegesis, occupied important positions in the
Sanhedrin ... played a major role in bringing on the crucifixion of Jesus" and they
"mainly belonged to the party of the Pharisees".
(Wycliffe's Bible Dictionary, p. 1536).

So the "Party of the Pharisees" consisted of: Religious scholars, theologians,

teachers of the law, and crucifiers of Jesus.

Jesus called the Scribes and Pharisees, "fools, hypocrites, blind guides, whited
sepulchers, murderers, a generation of snakes," and many such epithets. Jesus
called them "hypocrites" seven times in one chapter. He spoke with scathing
derision to the Scribes and Pharisees throughout His ministry; very few of them
received a kind word from Him.

Jesus said that the religious leaders in Israel (the Scribes and Pharisees), were of
the Devil:

"Ye [all of you] are of your FATHER THE DEVIL, and the lusts of your
father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode
not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a
lie, he speaks of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And
because I tell you the truth, ye believe Me not" (John 8:44-45).

Who are the "Ye" whom Jesus said are of your father the Devil?" The
answer is found in Vs.13, "the Pharisees," the religious leaders of God's
Church. These were mortal men, not spirit demons.
"And said, O full of all subtilty [dishonest, trickery] and all mischief, you
CHILD of the Devil, you ENEMY of all righteousness, wilt thou not
cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?" (Acts 13:10).

Paul identifies this "child of the Devil" as a Jewish false prophet, a mortal man,
not a demon (See Vs. 6).

On another occasion Jesus called those whom were likened to tares [darnels], "the
children of the Wicked [or 'Evil'] one" (Matt. 13:38). And the Wicked one is
none other than "the enemy that sows them is the Devil" (See Vs. 39).

Are these "children of the Wicked one," mortal men, or spirit demons? There
are two categories of people in this parable:

"The field is the world; the good seed are

[1] the children of the kingdom; but the tares are

[2] the children of the wicked one" (Matt. 13:38).

The "children" of the kingdom and "children" of the wicked one, are both mortal
men, not spirit demons. Demons are not mortal and demons are not visible.

All throughout the Bible we find God condemning the spiritual leaders of his people
for their sins and unwillingness to show God's people the right way to live and
worship God. Below I give just one example of God's disdain for numerous
categories of spiritual leaders:

FALSE APOSTLES: "For such are false apostles, deceitful workers,

transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ" (II Cor. 11:13).

FALSE PASTORS: "Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter
the sheep" (Jer. 23:1).

FALSE PROPHETS: "Thus says the LORD concerning the prophets that
make my people err, that bite with their teeth, and cry, Peace; and
he that puts not into their mouths, they even prepare war against
him" (Micah 3:5).

FALSE WATCHMEN: "His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant,
they are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark; sleeping, lying down,
loving to slumber" (Isaiah 56:10).
FALSE SHEPHERDS: "My people hath been lost sheep: their shepherds
have caused them to go astray..." (Jer. 50:6).

FALSE PRIESTS: "Her priests have violated my law, and have profaned
mine holy things: they have put no difference between the holy and
profane, neither have they showed difference between the unclean
and the clean, and have hid their eyes from my sabbaths, and I am
profaned among them" (Ezek. 22:26).

Just witness the countless thousands of children (most little boys) who have been
sexually molested by the very priests they have been taught to look up to and

FALSE MINISTERS: "Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also

be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall
be according to their works" (II Cor. 11:15).

FALSE TEACHERS: "For the time will come when they will not endure
sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to
themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away
their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables."
(II Tim. 4:3-4).


Jesus showed greater condemnation toward the leaders of God's Church than any
other category of people during His entire ministry. Selections from Matt. 23:

"But WOE unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, HYPOCRITES... FOR YOU
...THEY BIND HEAVY BURDENS and GRIEVOUS to be borne, and lay
them on men's shoulders; but will not move them with ONE OF

WOE unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, HYPOCRITES... you DEVOUR

WIDOW'S HOUSES... you shall receive the greater damnation.
WOE unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, HYPOCRITES...
WOE unto you, ye BLIND GUIDES...

WOE unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, HYPOCRITES! You... have

omitted... JUDGMENT, MERCY, and FAITH...
You BLIND GUIDES, which strain out a gnat, and SWALLOW A
WOE unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, HYPOCRITES... within they

WOE unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, HYPOCRITES! You are FULL

WOE unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, HYPOCRITES!... you are the
children of them which KILLED the prophets. FILL YOU UP then the
measure of your fathers.
CRUCIFY... you SCOURGE in your synagogues... Behold your house
is left unto you DESOLATE"!

WOW! Every one of these comments from Matt. 23 were spoken directly to the
"Religious Scholars and Theologians" in the Church of God centered at the
Temple in Jerusalem. Would Jesus speak in the same manner to the Religious
Scholars and Theologians in God's Church today? Does Jesus "change"? NO.
Has the Church changed in the past 2000 years? YES. It has gotten WORSE.
The Scribes and Pharisees were just as respected by the citizens of their day just as
the priests,
Jesus warned:

"For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed
the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case
enter into the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 5:20).

He could just as well have warned us today: "Except your righteousness shall
exceed the righteousness of the priests, ministers, pastors and theologians of the
Christian Church, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven."


"For I know this that after my departing [the Apostle Paul] shall
grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of
your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things to draw
away disciples after them" (Acts 20:29-30).

It is only when Jesus confronts the religious leaders that His tone of voice and choice
of words changes dramatically from how He spoke to the people in general. Jesus
came to expose evil and hypocrisy like no one had ever done before. His voice was
the "voice of a trumpet." God told Isaiah to:
"Cry ALOUD, SPARE NOT, lift up your voice like a TRUMPET, and
show my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their
sins" (Isa. 58:1).

Likewise, as a servant of God I cannot expose the evil and hypocrisy in the Church
and in this world with a song in my heart, a smile on my face, and a chuckle in my
voice! Sorry, but that won't get the job done. But try to palm off the evil and vile
doctrines of the Church to God's "little ones,"

God is Good, and God is Wise, and God is Powerful, and God is LOVE, and God is
enlarging His Family with billions of Sons and Daughters who will truly be for the first
time in history, purged and purified, and finally molded into the desire of God's heart
from the beginning of time when He declared: "Let Us be making humanity...
in OUR Image!"

It will be a painful and tormenting journey. It will be the most difficult thing that any
human will ever experience in all eternity, but it must be done. It is only temporary,
and it will yield ETERNAL GLORY to God and our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,
and ETERNAL GLORY to the entire human race. There will be no eternal hellhole of
misery, heartache, and suffering in God's universe. And He has given us a foretaste
of good things to come. And through His Spirit, and through faith and hope, we can
see already the spiritual joys of a never-ending life in the Kingdom and Family of

"For this is GOOD and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
WHO WILL HAVE ALL MEN TO BE SAVED, and to come unto the
knowledge of the truth" (I Tim. 2:4).

This IS the "desire and good pleasure" of God Almighty. And God has said:
"My counsel shall stand, and I WILL DO ALL MY PLEASURE"
(Isa. 46:10) despite those clergymen of the world who contradict and teach to the
contrary. Many hate, and loathe, and despise these plain and simple declarations of
God. But their time is very short. I have presented just a small part of the GOOD
NEWS GOSPEL that precious few on earth have ever heard or experienced.

The "TRUMPET" of Isaiah 58:1 is being sounded and in articles like the one
you are now reading.

"But there were false prophets also among the people, even
privately shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord
that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the
way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make
merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingers not,
and their damnation slumbers not" (II Pet. 2:1-3).

there were false prophets also among the people

We have seen a list of false prophets of old and some in our day. Notice all the
Scriptures where God utterly condemns the prophets, shepherds, watchmen,
pastors, and priests over Israel, and then see how many Scriptures you can find
where God praises these same religious leaders of His Church.

there shall be false teachers among you

I have shown you the Scriptures regarding "false teachers" in the Scriptures, and
I have shown you some of the "false teachers among you" that have lied to
the modern Church of God in our day and age.

shall bring in damnable heresies

What "damnable heresies?" Notice the future tense of this statement of
Peter's: "shall bring in damnable heresies." What damnable heresies are
being taught "among you" today that were not taught in the time of Peter and the
Apostles? Well, the most offensive of all is the Christianization of the pagan hell of
torture in literal fire, for all eternity.

Notice that "heresies" is in the plural. To the eternal hell heresy, we could add
many more unscriptural teaching in the apostate Church. Here are a few examples:
the "immortal soul" doctrine; the "judgment at death without a
trial" doctrine; the "man has a free will, free choice, free moral
agency" heresy; the "most of humanity will be eternally lost" heresy;
the "Satan was once a perfect and beautiful archangel" heresy;
the "heaven & earth was created in 144 hours only six thousand
years ago" heresy; the "priests can't marry" heresy; the "many desires of
God will fail" heresy; the "Jesus will fail to be the Saviour of the
world" heresy; the "it's okay to go to war and kill one's
enemies" heresy; the "Bible is literal" heresy; the "Jesus never
died" heresy; the "God is a trinity" heresy. Etc...

many shall follow their pernicious ways

As always, it is always the "many" who are following the wrong way, the broad
way, that is presently leading to "destruction" (Matt. 7:13). So in this case
also, whom is it that are "following the pernicious ways" (the broad way, the
WRONG way) of the Church? Why it is the "many." Pernicious means, waste, ruin,
damnable, destructive, to die.
denying the Lord that bought them
"Lord" means "Master," "Controller," "Supreme authority." So how does
the Church deny the Supreme authority of their Master and Controller? By denying
that Jesus is the Master, Controller, and Supreme authority send by God, and
denying that Jesus will do what He was commissioned by His Father to do: First and
foremost: "To BE the Saviour of the World" (I John 2:2; 4:14;
John 1:29; John 4:42).

the way of truth shall be evil spoken of

Since most Christians don't know "the way of truth," this one is difficult for them
to understand. All we have to do is pay close attention to whom Peter is addressing
with this "evil condemnation of the truth." Notice once again, as with the
many examples presented in this paper, that it is the "many" members of the
Church, not atheistic outsiders, that are speaking evil of the truth. If the Church has
the truth, then the "many" members of the Church would not be "speaking evil
of the truth." But no, the "many" members OF the Church, IN the Church are
speaking evil of those who have "come OUT OF HER" -- the apostate
Church (Rev. 18:4), and are now speaking and living "the way of truth."

they with feigned words make merchandise of you

"Feigned" means false. Their words are false and their doctrines are likewise false.
They invent unscriptural nonsense such as "TITHE MONEY." Money was never a
tithable commodity. Tithing was a "law" in ancient Israel (Heb. 7:5), not
a "principle" as the Church now calls it seeing that they have done away with the
law, yet they cling to tithing like it was the goose that laid the golden eggs.
They "make merchandise" of you, that is they buy merchandise--with your
money--TITHE MONEY. They need your money to support their lavish and gaudy
life styles. Many pastors lust for Rolex watches, Giorgio Armani and Brioni suits
(from £3000 to £6000), mansions, yachts, corporate jets, expensive foods
and wine, hookers and prostitutes, or anything else their worldly, materialistic,
and carnal little heart‘s desire.

I heard prophet Benny Hinn with my own ears state on international television that
there are people that are destined for the fires of hell simply because people have
not send in enough money to reach them with their version of the
gospel. OH MY MY!

Does the lifestyle of those on TBN (T.V) mirror in any way the sacrifices that they ask
(intimidate) poor people to make? I think not. Notice that they use "feigned
words." That means false words. Using our tithing heresy example, they want
you to think that : "God loves a cheerful TITHE-PAYER" (II Cor. 9:7) rather
than a "cheerful GIVER." It is not wrong to voluntarily give money to help with
Church expenses, but it is a sin to say it is a law, the breaking of which brings death.
How long will Church leaders get away with their unscriptural and ungodly doctrines?
Only as long as any one of them can live. After that, Judgment.

There is coming a resurrection to judgment. No, no one is coming back from heaven
to be judged, neither is anyone coming back from hell to be judged. "For the time
is come that judgment must begin at the house of God [for those called
and chosen few Elect]: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of
them that obey not the gospel of God?" (I Pet. 4:17).

Them that obey not the gospel will come up in judgment, and in judgment, the
along with the inhabitants of the whole world, "will learn righteousness"
(Isa. 26:9). For those who have known what the Scriptures say, and yet flagrantly
despise God's Word, judgment will not be a happy time, although it will eventuate in

Dare we take a look at religion while we are at it? Well, it's all about to come down,
and come down very hard.

More to come, so stay tuned. God loves you.

Welcome to mis-translations and mis-interpretation

I have a standing Axiom in terms of biblical teachings, if the church teaches it then it‘s false.
There is not one single doctrine that the church practices that the Apostles left us. The church
has had an interest in teaching ―eternal‖ judgement. The church has depended on threats
of future torment to keep its grip on its members. Eternal judgement has been the party line.
All verses that contradict it have been ignored or twisted to mean something different from
their obvious meaning. We are so accustomed to the lie, that we find it difficult to accept the

When we study the scriptures on the final destiny of believers and unbelievers, we meet an
apparent contradiction.

Some scriptures seem to say that THE ENTIRE human race will be SAVED. Consider
the following:

 ‗...God, who is the Saviour of ALL men, ESPECIALLY of

believers‘ (1 Tim 4: 10).

 ―For as in Adam ALL die, so also in Christ ALL shall be made

alive‘ (1 Cor. 15: 22-24).

Paul here simply states that ALL die in Adam, and in Christ ALL will be made alive, though
not at the same time or all in this age. Salvation is not for all in this life, but in progressive
ages and stages.

 ‗For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in

him (Jesus), and through him to RECONCILE to himself ALL things,
whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace
through the blood of his cross.‘ (Col 1: 19, 20).

Sin did separate us from GOD but now we ALL will be going back to the Father because the
SON has reconciled ALL things back to the father, Other scriptures appear to teach that
unbelievers will suffer “eternal” torment.
 ‗They will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the
presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And
the smoke of their torment goes up ―FOR EVER‖ and ―EVER‖ ...‘
(Rev 14: 10, 11).

 ‗... for whom black darkness has been reserved ―FOR

EVER‖ ‘ (Jude 13).

 ‗Then they will go away to ―ETERNAL‖ punishment, but the

righteous to ETERNAL life‘ (Mat 25: 46).

How can we reconcile this apparent contradiction in the scriptures? How can both teachings
be correct?

The problem has come from the words eternity, everlasting and for ever which is
translated from OLAM (Hebrew) and AION (Greek). We need to understand that, the
bibles that we have now is not what the Prophets and Apostles penned down by the
inspiration of the spirit of GOD. We have too many mistranslation phrases and wrong words
added to the bible and too many bogus teachings from the pulpit and seminaries.

A dictionary or lexicon is not the most authoritative place to find the true definition of a
word. Especially if the word in question makes or breaks a particular controversial doctrine,
such as, is punishment of the wicked for a period of time that ends, or for ―eternity‖.

OLAM (Hebrew) = AION (Greek) = AEON (English)...all the three mean the same thing
= a period of time (long or short) And Not For Ever, Everlasting Or

Why did the translators decided to drop aeon (the English equivalent) and
rather choose to use everlasting, eternal and forever? Just to make a
doctrine stand. Who wrote the dictionary and the lexicons? Is every definition in the lexicon
and dictionary correct? This might be your first time hearing this, but I bet you, start checking
on words in the dictionary and the lexicons now, You will find errors.

If we argue that meanings of words have changed over the years, it is true, but will that
change Gods word? Nope, Never. GOD FORBIDS!!

In many Bibles the Greek word: "aion" is translated as "forever", and "aionios" is
translated, "everlasting," or "eternal." HOW PRAY TELL!!
Dr Strong's Greek Dictionary defines "aion" as follows: "an age, perpetuity, the
world, a Messianic period, course, eternal, forever, evermore,
without end." Strong's defines the adjective aionios as follows: "perpetual,
eternal, forever, everlasting."

Are these definitions good scholarship or religious bias? Does anyone see a problem
with Dr Strong's definition of "aion/aionios?"

The fact that there may or may not be "cults" who claim that the word "olam/ aion" is
mistranslated in many Bibles, has absolutely nothing to do with the validity of the argument.
I personally know that "olam/ aion" is not translated properly in most places of the King
James Bible, yet I am not a CULT neither a Universalist but rather hungry for the truth...some
say am a pagan yet they can‘t define the word paganism. The reason given as to why this
word cannot be translating "everlasting" is, The true test of this word‘s meaning, is usage
and etymology (history of the word).

I will prove that it does not ever mean "without beginning or end" or "eternal" in
the Scriptures. Note: When I refer to the "Scriptures," I am assuredly not referring to
error-filled Bible translations of the Scriptures but the original scripts (Greek/Hebrew).

I have argued this point for the past years. Just because a word translated
WRONGLY can still make sense does NOT justify doing so. Perchance
someone might wish to translate Mark 9:41 as follows: "For whosoever shall give
you a GLASS OF ICE COLD LEMONADE to drink in my name… shall
not lose his reward." Does not the verse make equal SENSE as when it is correctly
translated "A CUP OF WATER?" Yes it does, but that is NOT what the Holy Spirit
inspired to be preserved for us. Hence, "a glass of ice cold lemonade" is wrong,
just as translating Rom. 16:26 as "the everlasting God," is wrong. The Holy Spirit
inspired the word aionios (adjective), which translated to our English
equivalent "aeonian (adjective)". The adjective is applied to some things which
are ‗endless‘ [as with ‗God‘ in Rom. 16:26] does NOT, of course, for one moment
prove that the word itself meant ‗endless‘...



It does not seem to have been generally considered by students of this subject that the thought
of endless duration is comparatively a modern conception. The ancients, at a time more
recent than the dates of the Old Testament, had not yet recognized the idea of endless
duration, so that passages containing the word applied to God do not mean that he is of
eternal duration, but the idea was for the fact that GOD is immortal. Immortals live on
and on but they do not define everlasting or eternity.

The pure idea of eternity is too abstract to have been conceived in the early ages of the world,
and accordingly is not found expressed by any word in the ancient languages. But as
cultivation advanced and this idea became more distinctly developed, it became necessary in
order to express it to invent new words in a new sense. The Hebrews were destitute of any
single word to express endless duration. To express a past ―eternity‖ they said before
the world was; a future, when the world shall be no more. . . . The Hebrews
and other ancient people have no one word for expressing the precise idea of eternity."


When the Old Testament was translated from Hebrew into Greek by the Seventy, the
word aion had been in common use for many centuries. It is outrageous to say that the
Seventy would render the Hebrew olam by the Greek aion and give to the latter
(1) a different meaning from that of the former, or
(2) A different meaning from aion in the current Greek literature. It is self-evident, then,
that Aion in the Old Testament means exactly what Olam means, and also
what Aion means in the Greek classics. A Period Of Time is the sense of olam, and it is
equally clear that aion has a similar signification.



Possibly the only truly unilateral covenant in the Bible, where absolutely no participation on
our part is required for its fulfilment. Gen. 9:16,

"And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may
remember the everlasting [Heb: olam] covenant between God and
every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth."

This covenant has no requirements on our part, but is it truly everlasting—endless?

If that covenant in Gen 9:16 is everlasting, then explain the following verse
and there is "A NEW heaven and a NEW earth: for the first heaven and
the first earth were PASSED AWAY; and there was no more sea
" (Rev. 21:1).

And when God says, "Behold, I make ALL THINGS NEW…." (Rev.
21:5), perhaps you can agree that this "rainbow covenant" will have come to an
END, and then be of no consequence or have no application in a scriptural, heavenly realm.
A new heaven and earth replaces an old one, is the covenant still running?

Gen17: 1-2 "And when Abraham was ninety years old and nine, the
Lord appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty
God; walk before Me, AND be you perfect. And I will make My
covenant between Me and thee, and will multiple thee

7-10 And I will establish my covenant between Me and thee and

your seed after you in their generations for an
everlasting [Heb: olam] covenant. And I will give unto you and to your
seed after you, the land wherein you are a stranger, all the land of
Canaan, for an everlasting [olam] possession… This is My covenant,
which ye shall keep, between Me and you and your seed after you;
Every man child among you shall be CIRCUMCISED…

13 He that is born in your house, and he that is bought with your

money, must be circumcised: and My covenant shall be in your flesh
for an everlasting [olam] covenant." (Gen. 17:1-2, 7-10, 13).


What we term the Old Covenant obviously was not to

continue "forever" or "eternally," as it was REPLACED by a NEW Covenant which
was clearly stated by Paul by the divine inspiration "NOT according to the
covenant that I made with their fathers…."(Heb. 8:9).

This is completely a different covenant, so how could the first covenant be termed everlasting
if it has been changed, are we saying GOD lied or our translators have lied against the word
of GOD? How pray tell! Grow up people!!!

How long did "EVERLASTING STATUTES" last?

Is the "everlasting statute" regulating the "day of atonement," still in

force? "And this shall be an EVERLASTING [olam] statute unto you, to
make atonement for the children of Israel for all their sins once a
year…." (Lev. 16:34). Now compare Rom. 5:11, "And not only so, but we
also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by Whom we have

So what do you suppose happened to that "EVERLASTING statute" regarding

atonement for sin?
"But in those sacrifices there is remembrance again made of sins
EVERY YEAR [on the day of ATONEMENT]… Then said He, Lo, I come to
do Thy will, O God, He TAKES AWAY THE FIRST [covenant] that He
may establish the second [covenant]. By the which will, we are
ONCE [no longer ‗once a year‘] FOR ALL" (Heb. 10:4, 9-10).

The Levitical Priests, the offering, the temple, the holy of holies is all, GONE! Now there is
ONE ATONEMENT for all, offered ONCE and never again.
This particular "eternity" lasted less than 1500 years! So just maybe an olam is NOT
ETERNAL after all. What do you think? Am not being funny here, I just want you to think.

The "EVERLASTING [olam] priesthood" of Exodus 40:15. And just how long
did this "everlasting priesthood" last?

"If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the
people received the law) what further need was there that another priest
should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after
the order of Aaron? For the PRIESTHOOD BEING CHANGED, there is
made of necessity a change also of the law…
For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe
Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood"(Heb. 7:11-12, 14).

And so we have no more "EVERLASTING" Levitical priesthood, but rather a CHANGE

in law and a CHANGE in the priesthood. And so this "everlasting/eternity" also
lasted 1500 years, and ENDED. How do we explain that? Theologians are lying, full of

I will give just one of many examples in the Old Testament where "olam" absolutely
cannot mean "forever" or "eternal" as Dr. Strong so Erroneously defines it:

Exodus 21:6 "Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he
shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his
master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve
him FOR EVER [Heb: „olam‟—Strong‘s „ETERNITY‟]."

Does Dr. Strong also believe in ETERNAL SLAVERY? That is too BAD...for him being the
most powerful bible concordance used worldwide...what a shame, poor scholarship.
Therefore we have just seen absolute and unarguable proof that the Hebrew olam does not
and cannot possibly mean everlasting or eternal.

The concept of "eternity" is foreign to the Holy Scriptures. There is virtually nothing that
is outside of the time periods known as aions. There are just a couple of hints regarding life
beyond the ages of time. Luke speaks of things pertaining to the Kingdom, not coming to an
end. And Paul tells us that in resurrection we will
have "incorruption" and "immortality" signifying "deathlessness," but neither
word has to do with time itself. Paul also speaks of a time in which God will be "ALL in
all." That is the extent to which the Scriptures even hint of eternity or anything beyond the
ages of time.

In II Corinthians Paul was telling us about some eternal things, let examine this

17 For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us
a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory;
18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things
which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but
the things which are not seen are eternal. II Cor. 4:17-18.

II Cor. 4:18 is neither speaking of "deathless" or "everlasting," as some

theologians suggest. It is speaking of what is happening now, in our life of flesh, and what
will happen during the ages of our reign with Christ in the kingdom of God. The things of
this life, we SEE daily. The things pertaining to the Kingdom of God are as yet "NOT seen."
Again, it is not even speaking of what is "visible" and "Invisible," but rather what is
NOW SEEN as compared with things "eonian" and NOT YET SEEN, which when seen
will not be temporary, but will last through whole aeons of time. And all that is perfected
through the Kingdom of God and the reign of Christ bringing all enemies into subjection, will
last on PAST the aeons, and will have NO END.

The next great event in prophecy is not eternity, but rather the END of this eon and the
BEGINNING of the next—the one in which the very elect will reign with Christ. There is no
sense in jumping into eternity when as yet, we have numerous ages to yet live and administer
God‘s government and His Great Judgment. And so, what is not yet seen,
is "aeonian" (pertaining to the eons), and not "eternity" as some of you, the
Theologians and the King James suggests in this verse.

Paul is contrasting what is "seen" now and what is "not seen," now, but is yet future.
Not contrasting material with spiritual, but rather what is perceived in this temporary life and
what is ahead as our reward in the Kingdom which is yet to come...
Paul is not speaking of spiritual things over the material world. Notice the previous verse:
17"Four our light affliction, which is but for a moment [this is temporary,
and this is what Paul tells us we are NOW OBSERVING], works for us a far more
exceeding and AIONIOS weight of glory."

Paul is contrasting the

[1] ‗light affliction‘ with
[2] ‗Exceeding weight of glory.‘

This cannot be denied, for I have just merely numbered the two contrasting points he is
making. Now then, we know that the ‗light affliction‘ is as he says ‗momentary‘—it is SEEN,
it is NOW, and it is TEMPORARY. But, he tells us that this NOW SEEN TEMPORARY
affliction will bring us an EXCEEDING WEIGHT OF GLORY. WHEN? IN THE
RESURRECTION, of course, the first resurrection, when we will be GLORIFIED WITH
CHRIST and… and what? Why we (chosen, few, elect) are to be "kings and
priests" with our Lord. When? All through ETERNITY? NO, during the "oncoming
These verses are speaking of the trials we now see and are enduring for a temporary moment,
contrasted with the glory that will be ours IN THE KINGDOM OF GOD on this earth ruling
and reign with Christ THROUGH THE AGES, not for eternity. Not even Christ rules
as "King" for eternity.

Therefore aeonians means —pertaining to the oncoming AGES. Our glorious

reign with Christ on the earth over the nations is for the AGES, not for eternity. The reign
of Christ COMES TO AND END, just as aionios comes to an end I Cor. 15:25-26.

God is NOT an "age lasting god" but rather "THE God of the ages." One has to
get it through the head that a Greek "aion" is English "aeon," and a Greek "aionios" is
English "aeonian." And they do not mean forever, eternity or everlasting.

Theologians normally quotes that eternity is time without end, this is NONSENSE! A
blatant lie. Eternity has no beginning no end, got nothing to do with time.

In Time There Is Change

In Eternity There Is No Change,
If There Was No Sun There Would Have Been No Days (Time)
If There Was No Moon There Would Have Been No Nights (Time)
Before Creation There Was No Time
Double Check Scriptures You Will Understand This.


*** it-2 pp. 1102-1103 Time Indefinite ***


The Hebrew word ‛oh·lam′ carries the thought of indefinite or uncertain time.
Lexicographer Gesenius defines it as meaning “hidden time, i.e. obscure and long, of which
the beginning or end is uncertain or indefinite.” (A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old
Testament, translated by E. Robinson, 1836, p. 746) Accordingly, expressions such as ―time
indefinite‖ (Ps 25:6), ―indefinitely lasting‖ (Hab 3:6), ―of old‖ (Ge 6:4), ―a
long time ago,‖ ―of long ago‖ (Jos 24:2; Pr 22:28; 23:10), and ―long-
lasting‖ (Eccl. 12:5) appropriately convey the thought of the original-language term.

The word ‛oh·lam′ is at times associated with that which is everlasting. (1Ki 2:45, ftn). The
prophet Isaiah wrote: “Jehovah, the Creator of the extremities of the earth, is a God to time
indefinite.” (Isa 40:28) Jehovah is ―from time indefinite to time
indefinite.‖ (Ps. 90:2) Since Jehovah is immortal and does not die,
he will continue to be God for all eternity. (Hab 1:12; 1Ti 1:17). However, the
Hebrew expression ‛oh·lam′ does not in itself mean ―forever.” It often refers to things
that have an end, but the period of such things‘ existence can be said to
be ‗to time indefinite‘ because the time of their end is not then
specified. For example, the „indefinitely lasting‟ Law covenant came to an end with
Jesus‟ death and the bringing in of a new covenant. (Ex 31:16, 17; Ro 10:4; Ga 5:18; Col
2:16, 17; Heb 9:15). And the „indefinitely lasting‟ Aaronic priesthood similarly came to an
end.—Ex 40:15; Heb 7:11-24; 10:1

Another Hebrew term, ‛adh, denotes unlimited future time, everlastingness, or eternity. (1Ch
28:9; Ps 19:9; Isa 9:6; 45:17; Hab 3:6). At times, as at Psalm 45:6, the words ‛oh·lam′ and
‛adh appear together and may be rendered “age-during, and for ever” (Yg), “age-abiding
and beyond” (Ro), and “time indefinite, even forever” (NW). Concerning the earth, the
psalmist declared: “It will not be made to totter to time indefinite, or forever.”—Ps 104:5.

The Hebrew term ne′tsach can also denote everlastingness. From Dr strong # 5331 :( always,
constantly, end, nevermore, perpetual, strength, victory Or netsach {nay'-tsakh}; from
natsach; properly, a goal, i.e. The bright object at a distance travelled towards; hence
(figuratively), splendor, or (subjectively) truthfulness, or (objectively) confidence; but usually
(adverbially), continually (i.e. To the most distant point of view); --alway(-s), constantly, end,
(+ n-)ever(more), perpetual, strength, victory.)

Among the ways it may be rendered are “forever” (Job 4:20; 14:20), “perpetually” (Isa
57:16), and “always” (Ps 9:18). Sometimes ne′tsach and ‛oh·lam′ occur in parallel (Ps
49:8, 9), or the terms ne′tsach and ‛adh appear together. (Am 1:11). All three words are
found at Psalm 9:5, 6: “You have rebuked nations . . . Their name you have wiped out to time
indefinite [le‛oh·lam′], even forever [wa·‛edh′]. O you enemy, your desolations have come to
their perpetual [la·ne′tsach] finish.”

In the Christian Greek Scriptures, the word ai·on′ may denote a time period of indefinite or
indeterminate length, a period of remote, but not endless, time. For example, at Luke
1:70 and Acts 3:21 ai·on′ can be rendered “of old,” “of old time,” “in ancient times.” (RS,
NW, AT) Often, however, the context suggests that ai·on′ is to be understood to refer to a time
period of undefined length because of such period being endless in duration. (Lu 1:55; Joh
6:50, 51; 12:34; 1Jo 2:17). Similarly, the adjective ai·o′ni·os (drawn from ai·on′) can, as is
evident from the context, signify both “long lasting” (Ro 16:25; 2Ti 1:9; Tit 1:2) and
“everlasting.” (Mt 18:8; 19:16, 29). Another Greek adjective, a·i′di·os, specifically means
“eternal” or “everlasting.”—Ro 1:20; Jude 6, NW, RS, AT; for a further consideration of

The Greek ―Aion.‖ “Age” may also refer to a period of time in man‟s history, whether
having or not having datable bounds. It is frequently used to translate the Greek word ai·on′
(plural, ai·o′nes) in some translations.
Greek lexicographers show the word to mean “space of time clearly defined and marked out,
epoch, age,” and also “lifetime, life,” or “age, generation.” Since an epoch, or age, can
begin and end or IT CAN GO ON FOREVER, it follows that ai·on′ could refer to a period of
time that is endless, though having a beginning. (This whole explanation is
nonsense and contradictory) bold writings are mine.

Thus, as recorded at Mark 3:29, Jesus said that the blasphemer against the holy spirit was
guilty of “everlasting [agelong, perpetual, eternal] sin,” or a sin never to be cancelled out at
any future time (THIS IS NEVER TRUE, IT‘S ONLY FOR THE AEONS) bold
comments are mine. A similar expression was used with regard to the fruitless fig tree, where
“forever” in the Greek is literally “to [for] the age.” (Mt 21:19) At Jesus‟ birth the
angelic promise was that “he will rule as king over the house of Jacob FOREVER [literally,
into the ages].”—Luke 1:33 (JESUS NEVER RULES FOREVER, THE
time), because he hands over the kingdom to the father who sent
him after destroying the last enemy, DEATH. God then becomes
king 1 Cor. 15 :24 - 28) bold writings are mine.

However, ai·on′ can also refer more particularly to the consistent state of things or the
current state of affairs or features that distinguish a certain period of time, epoch, or age
rather than to the matter of time itself In the Hebrew Scriptures. The Hebrew
term che′ledh is similar in meaning to ai·on′, referring in some texts to “life‟s
duration” (Job 11:17; Ps 39:5; 89:47), but in other cases the features of the time period
appear to be the main thing signified, allowing for rendering it “system of things.” (Ps
17:13, 14; 49:1) Some translations use the word “world” to render this term in these latter
texts, but this rendering more or less bypasses the sense implied, namely, that of continuing
*** w96 4/1 pp. 10-15 Praise the King of Eternity! ***

“Jehovah is King to time indefinite, even forever.”—PSALM 10:16.

ETERNITY—what would you say it is? Do you think time could really go on forever? Well,
there is no question that time stretches forever into the past. So why not forever into the
ETERNITY) bold writings are mine. Indeed, the New World Translation of the Bible refers
to God as being praised “from time indefinite even to time indefinite.” (Psalm
PRAISES) bold writings are mine.

I can go on and on and on from the Jehovah witness archives but there is no need.

End Of Jehovah Witnesses Archives...


The New World Translation (which is the Jehovah‘s Witnesses‘ Bible) DOES
translate "aionion" (albeit erroneously) as "everlasting—"…in accord with the
commandment of the EVERLASTING God…." (Rom. 16:25, New World
Translation). Yet they still argue this out as correctly translated likewise all Christendom.

Let‘s compare the following verse from two popular archrivals in Christendom...
"And these will depart into Everlasting CUTTING-OFF, but the righteous ones
into EVERLASTING life" (Matt. 25:46, New World Translation of
Jehovah‘s Witnesses).

―And these shall go away into Everlasting PUNISHMENT: but the righteous into
life ETERNAL‖ (Matt. 25:46, King James Version).

The word translated cutting off by JW and Punishment by KJV is a Greek

word ―Kolasin‖ which means cutting off and NO T punishment...

This verse has many problems. The JW‘s followed the error of the KJV with reference
to "aionio.‖. Actually the New World Translation
(JW) translated ―kolasin‖ correctly than KJV, because the word is
not "punishment." The Greek word "kolasin" comes from "kolazo" and it means
to "cut off" or to "prune." Since the New World Translation knew to properly translate
this word "cutting off," it is remarkable that they still erred and translated "aionio" as
everlasting, hence: "everlasting cutting-off." Pruning is administered to INCREASE
LIFE AND PRODUCTION. They should have seen by this alone that this "pruning" could
not be "everlasting.‖ JW on this subject is far better than KJV. So stop calling the
Jehovah witness as a false religion, prove yourself right with your own error filled King

Bear in mind that the proper translation of the word "punishment" is used but one time
only in the New Testament with reference to sinners, and that is in Heb. 10:29 ―Of how
much sorer PUNISHMENT, suppose ye, ...‖

Dr Strong # 5098 Gk=timoria From timoreo ; means vindication, i.e. a penalty --


And nowhere else in the entire New Testament! Yes nowhere else unless is a wrong

The word "kolasin" is better translated "chastening" which agrees

with pruning or cutting off and not punishment.
And "aionio (Greek)" mean "aeonian (English)"—pertaining to the
aions, hence "chastening aeonian" is the proper translation.
And "life aeonian" is also proper. Hence both times "aionio" is aeonian and
not eternal. The life that is promised to the elect who overcome is life for the aeons—
"aeonian life." They are promised ruler ship with Jesus on this earth over the
nations, Rev. 2:26. They are NOT promised ruler ship over the nations for all eternity,
as not even Christ Himself rules over the nations eternally:

TO GOD the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority
and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies
DEATH. 27 For he ―has put everything under his feet.‖ Now when it
says that ―everything‖ has been put under him, it is clear that this
does not include God himself, who put everything under
Christ. 28 When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made
subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be
ALL in ALL. (I Cor. 15:24-28 NIV).

The Elect will reign and JUDGE the nations not only through the millennium, but also for the
whole period of the Great White Throne/Lake of fire/Second death judgment.
And AFTER the consummation of the ages, the elect saints continue to live, not because they
were promised "eternal" life, but because they have been resurrected from the dead or
changed at our Lord‘s coming, hence they are all given IMMORTALITY! Which means that
they will NEVER EVER die, even though they have never been promised "eternal" life by
such a name or term,

The Scriptural fact that God is an "aionios [aeonian] God" in no way suggests that God
lives only for the period covered by the word "aionios." That is unjustifiable speculation
based on false deductions from a false premise. This reasoning is so silly that it hardly
deserves comment.

In Gen. 24:3 we read that God is the "God of the earth." Now the earth is visible; is God
therefore visible? No. The earth is physical; is God therefore physical? No.
The earth will pass away (Matt. 24:35); does this mean that God too
will "pass away," since He is the "God" of this "visible, material, passing
away" earth? NO. Pretty silly huh?

Now for one of the most important truths of all regarding this word "aionios." When God
says that He is "the AEONIAN God," He is stating a FACT. That Jesus
procured "AEONIAN redemption" for us, is a statement of FACT. Neither "aeonian
God" nor "aeonian redemption" are statements of LIMITATION. And to suggest
that they are statements of limitation is to pervert the Scriptures—they neither say nor
insinuate any such thing.

This principle of stating a FACT, which is not a statement of LIMITATION, is found

throughout the Scriptures. God is for example: "The God OF Abraham, OF Isaac,
and OF Jacob" (Ex. 3:6). This is a statement of FACT. It is not a statement of
LIMITATION. This statement of fact does not limit God from also being the God of Moses,
David, Peter and Paul.

If the statement said that God is the "God of Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob ONLY," then it would be a statement of limitation, but we don‘t find any such
words of limitation in the verses in question. It doesn‘t say that God is the "eonian God,
ONLY," or that Jesus procured "eonian redemption ONLY" for us. Does it?

I have no problem with the fact that "immortality" is practically "eternal." That is,
those with immortality live eternally. But that is NOT what the words themselves mean.
Eternal does not MEAN immortality anymore than immortality means eternal.

Let’s have a little common sense and wisdom regarding this matter. It is senseless to state
that "God is eternal." The very fact OF God is proof in itself that God IS eternal. We do
not speak of "wet rain," do we? We do not say: "It‘s raining WET rain." The very
fact OF rain assumes that it is WET. The writers of Scripture had NO WORD in their
vocabulary which could be defined as "endless time." But they DID have a word that
signified "no death." Immortality means DEATH=LESS=NESS, not eternal or

The word "eternal" comes from the Latin "aeternum" which in the first century meant
virtually the same as the word "seculum," and in fact, Saint Jerome (one of the first to
translate the bible into latin---the now vulgate) sometimes rendered "aion" aeternus,
and in other places he renders "aion" as seculum. They were considered virtually
synonyms. Here is how the Latin dictionaries define, seculum—"a generation, an
age, the world, the times, the SPIRIT OF THE TIMES, and a period of
a hundred years."

Jesus doesn‘t reign over ANYONE "forever." That is not a translation, but an
interpretation. If Jesus reigns "forever," then Paul lied in I Cor. 15:25 where he tells us
that Jesus rules ONLY UNTIL He puts down all enemies. He then TURNS OVER THE
KINGDOM TO HIS GOD AND FATHER. He STOPS reigning. His "eternal" reign
COMES TO AN END, because His reign is "aionion" and not "eternal."

The kingdom does continue; it is endless. However, Jesus as "King" of this kingdom
is "eonian" and NOT ENDLESS, as we have clearly seen from I Cor. 15:24-25.

Some argue that "Aeon" in the singular means "age," but in the plural it
means "forever" or "eternal." Let‘s see how the Greek Septuagint uses both the
singular and plural forms in these two verses":

Singular: Micah 4:5—"ets ton aiona kai epekeina….for

the eon and BEYOND." Well that can‘t possibly mean forever for eternal, as there can be
nothing "beyond" eternity.
I hope my readers got that?? Read it again and again and again!!!

Plural: Dan. 12:3—"eis tous aionas kai eti….for

the eons and LONGER." Once again, there can be nothing "longer" than
eternity. Besides, how is it possible to have a plurality of "eternities?" how pray tell?

Here are just a few scriptures in which "aionios" cannot possibly

mean eternal:

1. Rom. 16:25—"…according to the revelation of the mystery, which

was kept secret since the world [Gk: aionios] began." Well check this bit of
translating genius out. We have the ADJECTIVE word "aionios" and the KJV translators
changed it to a NOUN, "world."

The word "world" (kosmos) is not found in this verse; furthermore, neither is the
word "began." The Greek reads: "…in times aeonian." Do we really believe
in "times eternal." What does "time," let alone "times" have to do
with "eternity?" And as Paul speaks of the "revelation" of this secret, how could it
EVER be revealed if it was kept secret ‗ETERNALLY?‘ Do you not see a problem—a
CONTRADICTION in all of this? NONSENSE! - remember that eternity has got nothing to
do with time.

2. II Thes. 2:16—"…and has given us everlasting consolation and

good hope through grace." "Console" is defined as, "To calm (allay)
sorrow or grief of." "Hope" is defined as, "To wish for something with
expectations of its fulfilment." Now then, according to this inane (silly) KJV
translation of this verse, just how long are we going to have our "Sorrow And Grief
Allayed?" How long must we "HOPE" before we have our hope fulfilled? For ALL
ETERNITY? Nonsense.

3. II Tim. 1:9—"…according to His own purpose and grace, which

was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began." The
word "world" is not found in the Greek manuscripts, the word "began" is not found in
the Greek manuscripts. Here is what the Greek says: "…before TIMES
AEONIAN." So where is the consistency with these translators? Could they not deceive the
readers by translating this verse properly?

If "aionios" means "eternal" or "evermore" then HOW pray tell, can there
be "TIMES" before "ETERNITY?" Give me a break. This is not translating; this is out
and out planned deception! They change an adjective into a noun, then change the noun to a
different word, then completely leave out the word "times." This total lack of scholarship
and honesty is reprehensible!
4. Jude 7—"Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about
them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and
going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the
vengeance of eternal fire." The Greek reads: "…experiencing the justice
of fire aeonian." Well just how long does this "aeonian/aionios fire last? Is it
really "eternal" as the Authorized Version and Christendom, contend?

A. There is NO FIRE burning in Palestine since the days of Sodom anywhere, let alone in
the vicinity of these ancient cities. The best archaeologists can discern that Sodom is located
at the bottom of what is now a sea.

B. Ezekiel 16:55—"When your sisters, SODOM and her daughters,

shall RETURN TO THEIR FORMER ESTATE, and Samaria and her
daughters shall return to their former estate, then you [Jerusalem] shall
return to your former estate."

The judgment of God against Sodom was decidedly not, ETERNAL. Here is clear
Scriptural evidence and proof that "olam/aion/aionios," etc., DO NOT MEAN
ETERNAL OR ENDLESS TIME. Give it up, The doctrine of "eternal torture" is
the most evil doctrine, teaching, or concept ever invented in the history of the universe. It is
the MOST blasphemous thing that could ever be attributed to our Lord and Father. Give it


It never ceases to amaze me that words (most words in most languages) have fairly precise
and restricted meanings until these same words are used in religion, where they apparently
lose all logic and preciseness of meaning.
I have proven beyond what you can ever imagine that aeons cannot be forever ...

See Its Simplicity:

There was a time before God made any eons (I Cor. 2:7).
Then God made the eons (Heb. 1:2).
There were eons in the past (Col 1:26).
We are living in this present wicked eon (Gal. 1:4).
Satan is the god of this eon (II Cor. 4:4).
Christ, not Satan, will reign a thousand years in the next eon (Luke 1:33).
The thousand years will come to an end (Rev. 20:3).
Christ will reign in the eon that follows the thousand years (Rev. 22:5 and Luke.
1:33). Hence, He reigns for the "eons" (the next two) "of the eons" (all others).
Then the last eon comes to an end (I Cor. 10:11).
Christ ceases to reign after the eons come to an end (I Cor. 15:24:28) because
He turns over the Kingdom to God His Father and God becomes "all in all."
The eons end, but that which is of the Kingdom continues (Luke 1:33 & Isa.
9:7). We all continue "living" after the eons because, just like God, we will then all
have been given immortality the scripture that says we are god becomes valid, grow
up people!!

There is not one word in either the Hebrew or Greek Scriptures that can be properly
translated "forever" or "eternity," or any other word meaning "endless" time.
Some might suggest that a verse such as Rom. 16:26-- " ... the
everlasting [Gk: 'aionian'] God" proves that aionian is eternal. It does not. Paul
isn't trying to tell us here that God lives "for ever." The Scriptures have long ago
told us that God's life has no end (Psalm 102:27). Paul is telling us that God is not
off in a corner somewhere unconcerned with mankind, but that He is " ... the
eonian God." That is, He is God of the eons in which we live (Rev. 15:8). This
does not say God ceases to exist at the end of the eons any more than Christ
ceases to exist after He is no longer "King of the eons (Rev. 5:3)."

When there are no more eons, Christ ceases to be the King of the eons (I Cor.
15:24). He certainly doesn't cease to exist. When the eons end (and they all will),
then God will be the same God He has always been.

We must be given immortality (I Cor. 15:53-54). Believers are promised "eonian

life" so they are given "immortality," which sees them through and beyond
eonian life. Unbelievers are NOT given "eonian life" or "immortality" at the
same time as believers are. Hence they can die in the second death. However, after
the eons end, they too, (all unsaved from Adam
on) are "vivified"[Greek: zoopoieo] (LIVE-DO)--given life beyond the reach of
death. This confers immortality (John 5:21-22, Rom. 4:17, I Tim. 6:13).

Read I Cor. 15:22-28."For even as in Adam, all are dying, thus also, in
Christ, shall all (this is the same "all" used both times) be vivified..."

There is a "class" or "order" to the vivification of all. First Christ, Second those
who are Christ's in His presence, Third the consummation. Christ reigns only until He
nullifies all sovereignty and all authority and power, and has placed all enemies
under His feet. The last enemy being abolished is death. Then Christ
Himself gives up the kingdom to His Father and becomes subject to His Father and
God becomes " ... ALL IN ALL."


It's just like most other basic truths of Scripture: they don't fit into
Christian theology.

Obviously, the Satanic teaching that God Almighty (full of mercy, love and grace) will
torture anyone endlessly (let alone the vast majority of humanity), is nowhere taught
or even hinted at anywhere in Scripture.

I am not just saying that, in my opinion, "aion" should not be

translated "eternal." I am saying "aion" cannot be translated "eternal"!

I prepared a chart below to show key verses on the aions from my research work.
The Greek word "aion" is here translated properly and consistently by two different
translations. Notice carefully the categories these verses fall into: BEFORE, MAKES,
possible to use any one of these words in conjunction with any word meaning
"endless time" or "eternity."

VERSION (1896)
I Cor. 2:7-- ... before the eons ... ... before the ages...

God MAKES the

Heb. 1:2-- ... makes the eons. ... made the ages.

PAST aions: Col. 1:26-- ... hid from eons... ... from the ages ...

... the present wicked ... present age ... an

PRESENT aion: Gal. 1:4---
eon ... evil one

END of present ... conclusion of the eon ... conclusion of the

Mat. 24:3--
aion: ... age...

... age that is coming

The NEXT aion: Lk. 18;30-- ... the eon to come ...
... ages that should
FUTURE aions: Eph. 2:7-- ... the oncoming eons ...
come ...

CONTRASTING Eph. 3:21-- ... the eon of the eons... ... age of the ages ...

I ... the consummations of ... the ends of the

ENDS of the aions:
Cor.10:11- the eons ... ages ...

Now try substituting the words "eternity," "forever," or "everlasting" in place of eon or
age and see what happens: "before the eternities," "the present wicked eternity,"
"the conclusion of the everlasting," "the oncoming forever‘s," "the eternity of the
eternities," "the consummation of the forever‘s." Interestingly,
Only a few translations render "aion" consistently. These translations are not
popular, however, because they are not endorsed by mainstream clergy. Most
people have never even seen these translations. What they do see are the
numerous popular translations that promote error upon error. I prepared a chart of
popular translations showing the extreme measures taken to pervert this simple
Greek word, "aion."


(This makes perfect sense) (This is nonsense)

Mat. " ... the worry of this ―... the cares of life... "
13:22 eon ... " (The Twentieth Century N.T.)

18:8 ―... eonian fire." ―... everlasting fire."

(Authorized King James

24:3 ―... conclusion of the ―... the world will come to an

eon." end."
(N.T. By: WmBeck)

28:20 ―... till the conclusion of ―... every day to the end of
the eon." time.
(Rieu's Four Gospels)

Mark ―... worries of this ―... but worldly cares ... "
4:19 eon..." (New English Bible: N.T.)

Luke ―... that eon... " " ... yonder world ... "
20:35 (N.T.: A New Testament-

John " ... has life eonian ...‖ ―... will live eternally ... "
6:54 (N.T. By: Monsignor Knox)

8:35 " ... for the eon ... " " ... remain permanently ... "
(N.T. by: Montgomery)

8:35 " ... for the eon ... " " ... in the house for ever ... "
(Authorized King James
8:51 ―... death for the eon... " " ... will never experience
death ... "
(N.T. by: Goodspeed)

Acts " ... from the eon ... " ―... from of old.."
3:31 (Revised Standard Version)

I Cor 2:7 " ... before the eons ... " " ... before time began ... "
(New Testament by: O.Norlie)

8:13 " ... eating meat for the ―... from flesh meat perpetually
eon ... " ..."
(N. T. By: Knox)

8:13 " ... eating meat for the " ... while the world stands ... "
eon ... " (Authorized King James

Eph. 3:9 " ... from the eons ... " " ... from the very beginning ...
(Living Gospels-Taylor)

3:11 " ... purpose of the eons " ... that timeless purpose ... "
... " (N.T. by: J.B. Phillips)

3:21 ―... of the eon of the ―... all ages, world without
eons." end."
(Authorized King James

Col. " ... from the eons ... " ―... for centuries... "
1:26 (Paraphrased Epistles-Taylor)

Titus " ... in the current eon ―... here and now ... "
2:12 ... " (New Testament-J. B. Phillips)

Heb. 1:2 " ... makes the eons ... " " ... made the universe ... "
(Epistles of Paul-Conybeare)

1:2 " ... makes the eons ... " " ... created all orders of
existence ... "
(New Eng. Bible)
1:2 " ... makes the eons ... " ―... this world of time ... "
(N.T. By: Monsignor Knox)

1:8 " ... for the eon of the " ... from everlasting to
eon ... " everlasting ... "

6:5 " ... the impending eon " ... the eternal world ... "
... " (N.T. by: J.B. Phillips)

6:20 " ... for the eon ... " ―... made for all time ... "
(Twentieth Century N.T.)

9:26 " ... conclusion of the " ... at the climax of history ... "
eons ... " (New Eng. Bible)

11:3 " ... eons to adjust ... " " ... the whole scheme of time
and space ... "

II Pet. " ... for the day of the " ... the day of eternity ... "
3:18 eon ... " (N.T. by: R.F. Weymouth)

Jude 25 " ... eon, now ... for all " ... before all time, ... and for
the eons ... " ever more ... "

Rev. " ... King of the eons ... " ... King of the nations ... "
15:3 " (N.T. By; Henry Alford)

5:13 " ... for the eons of the *" ... the eternities of the
eons ... " eternities... "
(Amplified N.T)

―... the eternities of the eternities ... " Now there's a strange rendering. I
nonetheless give the translator credit for his stupid consistency. If aion
means "eternity" then aions would mean "eternities." If someone can explain
to me the meaning of "the eternities of the eternities".

So how did the translators handle a verse like Matt. 24:3, ―... conclusion of
the eon ...?" Remember they insist in other places that "aion" is "forever," and
now they have to translate a verse claiming that this particular eon is going to end.
How can forever "end?" Being in a fix, the translators changed the meaning
of "aion" again, and translated this verse ―... end of the world ...‖ Now, think
for a moment. Since they insist elsewhere that "aion" means "eternal" (which of
course it doesn't), how could it possibly mean "world" here? It couldn't. The Greek
word for world is "kosmos" not "aion." Do you want to be among the fooled?

Check enough English Translations, and you will find all of the following diverse
words absurdly translated from the Greek word "aion:" I think we are learning
something good fella‘s.

"beginning" and "end" "first" and "very first"

"evermore" and "nevermore" "before time began" and "end

of time"

"of old" and "today" "nations" and "saints"

"permanently" and "never while the "the world" and "the universe"
world lasts"

"for all time" and "before all time" "ancient" and "here and now"

"immortal" and "never to the end of "end of the world" and "world
my days" without end"

"ancient" and "yonder world" "always" and "never"

You are looking at an amazing thing, which is false translating in action. This is
certainly not "a pattern of sound words" (II Tim. 1:13-14)!
Who would ever condone such a butchering of God's Word, Who? Most of the
world's theologians and clergy, that's who, Not only do they condone it, but they
endorse it, Nonsense!

The word "eternal" was completely unknown (in any of the old English Bibles),
before the Renaissance.

Psa. 73:12--"Behold, these are the ungodly, who prosper in

the WORLD; they increase in riches."
The word translated "world" is olam which they translate "everlasting" in
dozens of other places. Clearly the "ungodly" do not prosper
for "eternity" or "everlasting." Who are they deceiving?

The Hebrew and Greek Languages had no word that meant "endless
time" or "eternity." And further, no one has ever found such a word in ANY
LANGUAGE before the second century to denote "endless time" or "eternity."
The facts regarding the temporary duration of the eons are contained in the
Scriptures themselves. This demolishes the eternal torment in
―Hell‖ heresy. Preachers love this eternal torment that‘s why they are refusing to
see the truth.

Adding a word so enormous as "endless" to a word that in no way means endless,

is a gross infraction of Christ's warning about "adding to" God's word.
(Rev. 22:18).


Who cares that the "secular Greek-English lexicon by Bauer" defines aionios as without
beginning or end and eternal? Does that mean that we should pick up our tents and go home?
Should we burn all the other lexicons and dictionaries on our book shelves that teach
contrary, because "Bauer has spoken?" If a dictionary definition carries weight on this matter,
then consider some real scholars on the subject:

Dr. Marvin Vincent, Word Studies of the New Testament (Vol. IV, p. 59).
The adjective aionios in like manner carries the idea of time. Neither the noun nor the
adjective in them carries the sense of "endless" or "everlasting.‘ Aionios means
enduring through or pertaining to a period of time.

Elliot‘s Commentary on the Whole Bible (Matt. 25:46). Everlasting

punishment--life eternal. The two adjectives represent the same Greek word, aionios—it
must be admitted that the Greek word which is rendered "eternal" does not, in itself,
involve endlessness, but rather, duration, whether through an age or succession of ages, and
that it is therefore applied in the N.T. to periods of time that have had both a beginning and
ending (Rom. 16:25).

An Alphabetical Analysis by Charles H. Welch (Editor of The Berean Expositor

and a man well versed in Greek), (Vol. 1, p. 279), "Eternity is not a Biblical
theme." (Vol. 1, p. 52), "What we have to learn is that the Bible does not speak of
eternity. It is not written to tell us of eternity. Such a consideration is entirely outside the
scope of revelation."
The chronoios aioniois moreover, are not to be thought of as stretching backward
everlastingly, as it is proved by the pro chronon aionion of II Tim. 1:9; Titus.
1:2. (Note: pro chronon aionion means "BEFORE times eonian." Since this
Scripture tells us that there was time "before" eonian, eonian cannot possibly mean eternal,
for nothing can be "before" eternity.)

The Interpreter‘s Dictionary of the Bible (vol. IV, p. 643): Time: The O.T.
and the N.T. are not acquainted with the conception of eternity as timelessness. The O.T. has
not developed a special term for "eternity." The word aion originally meant "vital
force," "life," "age," "lifetime."
The large Catholic Bible dictionary, The Encyclopedic Dictionary of the
Bible (p. 693): ETERNITY: The Bible hardly speaks of eternity in the philosophical
sense of infinite duration without beginning or end. The Hebrew word olam, which is used
alone (Ps. 61:8; etc.) or with various prepositions (Gen. 3:22; etc.) in contexts where it
is traditionally translated as ‗forever,‘ means in itself no more than
‗for an indefinitely long period." Olam does not mean ‗from eternity‘ but
‗of old‘ Gen. 6:4; etc.). In the N.T. aion is used as the equivalent of olam. (Note:
even the Catholic translators of The Jerusalem Bible and The New American Bible have failed
to heed the scholarship of their own Catholic authorities.)

Dr. R. F. Weymouth, a translator who was adept in Greek, states in The New
Testament in Modern Speech (p. 657), Eternal, Greek aionion, i.e., of the
ages: Etymologically this adjective, like others similarly formed does not
signify, "during" but "belonging to" the aions or ages.

The Interpreter‘s Dictionary of the Bible, (Vol. 4, p. 641), "The O.T. and
the N.T. are not acquainted with the concept of eternity as timelessness. ―Page 655: "The
O.T. has not developed a special term for eternity. " Page 645: "The use of the
word aion in the N.T. is determined very much by the O.T. and the LXX
(Septuagint). Aion means long, distant, uninterrupted time. The intensifying
plural occurs frequently in the N.T. but it adds no new meaning."

Hasting‘s Dictionary of the New Testament (Vol. I, p. 542, art. Christ

and the Gospels): Eternity. There is no word either in the O.T. Hebrew or the N.T.
Greek to express the abstract idea of eternity. (Vol. III, p. 369): Eternal, everlasting—
nonetheless "eternal" is misleading, inasmuch as it has come in the English to connote the
idea of "endlessly existing," and thus to be practically a synonym
for "everlasting." But this is not an adequate rendering of aionios which varies in
meaning with the variations of the noun aion from which it comes. (p. 370):

Dr. Edward Plumptre, an eschatologist, "I fail to find, as is used by the Greek Fathers, any
instance in which the idea of time duration is unlimited."

Time and Eternity by G. T. Stevenson, (p. 63), "Since, as we have seen, the
noun aion refers to a period of time it appears, very improbable that the derived
adjective aionios would indicate infinite duration, nor have we found any evidence in
Greek writing to show that such a concept was expressed by this term."

Professor Herman Oldhausen, German Lutheran theologian, "The Bible has no expression
for Endlessness. All the Biblical terms imply or denote long periods."

Professor Knappe of Halle wrote, "The Hebrew was destitute of any single word to express
endless duration. The pure idea of eternity is NOT FOUND IN ANY OF THE ANCIENT
The Complete Works of Falvius Josephus. Josephus obviously did not consider aionios to
be "everlasting," seeing that he uses the word to represent the period of time between the
giving of the law of Moses and that of his own writing [clearly not an eternity]. He also
assigns aionios to the period of imprisonment of the tyrant John by the Romans [clearly he
was not imprisoned for an eternity], and also for the period during which Herod‘s temple
stood [since Herod‘s temple was not even standing at the time Josephus wrote, it too proves
that Josephus did not mean ‗eternity‘ when he wrote ‗aionios‘].

Saint Gregory of Nyssa speaks of aionios diastema, "an aeonian interval." How
many intervals do you know of that are "endless" or "eternal?"

Saint Chrysostum, in his homily on Eph. 2:1-3, says that, "Satan‘s kingdom
is aeonian; that is, it will cease with the present world."

Saint Justin Martyr, in the Apol. (p. 57), used the word aionios repeatedly: aionion
kolasin…all ouchi chiliontaete periodon, "eonian chastening but a period, not
a thousand years," or as some translate this clause "but a period of a thousand
years only." Hence, to Justin Martyr, aionios was certainly not "endless."

In Dr. Farrar‘s book, Mercy and Judgment, (p. 378), "Since aion
meant ‗age,‘ aionios means, properly, ‗belonging to an age,‘ or ‗age-
long,‘ and anyone who asserts that it must mean ‗endless‘ defends a position which even
Augustine practically abandoned twelve centuries ago. Even if aion always
meant ‗eternity,‘ which is not the case in classic or Hellenistic Greek—aionios could
still mean only ‗belonging to eternity‘ and not ‗lasting through it."

Dr. F. W. Farrar, author of The Life of Christ and The Life and Word of St.
Paul, as well as books about Greek grammar and syntax, writes in The Eternal
Hope (p. 198), "That the adjective is applied to some things which are ‗endless‘ does
not, of course, for one moment prove that the word itself meant ‗endless;‘ and to introduce
this rendering into many passages would be utterly impossible and absurd."


Picture yourself being burned and tortured without relief and without any hope for trillions of
centuries. Well, of course, we humanly cannot imagine such torture or such a long period of
time -our minds and our emotions are incapable of it. If any sane Christian could witness,
even for a few hours or a few days, the kind of hideous torture presented by Christian
doctrine, I believe he would seriously reconsider whether a loving God is capable of such
sadistic punishment. But consider a trillion centuries of such torture? For WHAT? Who is
appreciating or benefiting from the spectre of such a hell hole of misery, pain, sorrow, and
total despair? God the Father? Christ Jesus? The Saints? The heavenly Host?

This may be the ―god‖ of Christendom, but I assure you it is NOT the All Wise, All
Knowing, All Merciful, All Loving, All Saving, and ALMIGHTY GOD, of the Holy
Scriptures! Christendom is fast becoming the dominant religion of the world. We only need
to consult God's Word to see who is "the god of this world" (II Cor. 4:4), and we
will know who it is that rules over these world-deceiving religions. " ... the ancient
serpent called Adversary and Satan, who is deceiving the WHOLE
INHABITED EARTH" (Rev. 12:9). "For such are FALSE APOSTLES, fraudulent
workers, being transfigured into APOSTLES OF CHRIST. And no marvel, for Satan himself
is being transfigured into a MESSENGER OF LIGHT [not a red, hoofed monster with horns
and a pitchfork]. It is no great thing, then, if his servants also are being transfigured as
DISPENSERS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS-whose consummation shall be according to their
acts" (II Cor. 11:13-15)!

I apologize for highly understating my feelings on this despicable teaching.


Unfortunately, most have never heard this verse correctly translated, most do not teach it,
most do not believe it:

―... yet God is commending this love of His to us, seeing that, while
we are still sinners, Christ died for our sakes. Much rather, then,
being now justified in His blood, we shall be saved from indignation,
through Him. For if, being enemies, we were conciliated to God
through the death of His son, much rather, being conciliated, we
shall be saved in His life" (Rom. 5:8-11).

For reconciliation to take place one party must be conciliated to a second party and the
second party must be conciliated back to the first party. Then, and only then, is there
reconciliation. God is now conciliated [Gk: katalla'sso = DOWN-CHANGE] to the
world because of His Son's sacrifice, and the world will one day be
reconciled [Gk: apokatalla'sso = FROM-DOWN-CHANGE] to God! Conciliation
has to do with one side only in an estrangement, whereas reconciliation has to do with both
sides of an estrangement. The Authorized Version does not make this vital distinction in the
Greek Text!

Here is how God does it:

"Consequently, then, as it was through one offense for all mankind

for condemnation, thus also it is through one just award for all
mankind for life's justifying For even as, through the disobedience of
the one man [Adam], the many were constituted sinners, thus also,
through the obedience of the One [Christ], the many shall be
constituted just" (Rom. 5:18-19).

That verse summarizes the who, what, when, where, why, and how of the Gospel.
Although God is now conciliated to mankind because of Christ's sacrifice on Calvary, will
mankind ever be conciliated to God, thus bringing about full reconciliation? Absolutely:

"For He is our Peace, Who makes both one [Jews and Gentiles-that's all the
people there are in the whole world], and razes the central wall of the
barrier (the enmity in His flesh), nullifying the law of precepts in decrees,
that He should be creating the two [both Jews and Gentiles], in Himself,
into one new humanity, making peace; and should be reconciling
both in one body to God, through the cross, killing the enmity in
it" (Eph. 2:14-16).

Second witness: Christ

"Who is the Image of the invisible God, Firstborn of every creature,

for in Him is all created, that in the heavens and that on the earth,
the visible and the invisible, whether thrones, or lordships, or
sovereignties, or authorities, all is created through Him and for Him,
and He is before all, and all has it cohesion in Him. And He is the
Head of the body, the ecclesia, Who is Sovereign, Firstborn from
among the dead, that in all He may be becoming first, for in Him the
entire complement delights to dwell, and through Him to reconcile
all to Him (making peace through the blood of His cross, through
Him, whether those on the earth or those in the heavens"
(Col. 1:14-20).

Read it again! "makes both one," "creating the two," "killing the enmity," "every creature,"
"all created," "in the heaven," "on the earth," "the visible," "the invisible," "all is created,"
"before all," "all," "in all," "the entire," "to reconcile all," "on the earth," "in the heavens."
How pray tell, are the billion of people that you think are left out of this Scripture are going
to burn in Hell Fire for all eternity?

Christ created all and will reconcile all- not only on earth, but also the whole heavenly host!
Do you honesty doubt that Christ "created all?" Do you? How then can you doubt that
He will reconcile the same "ALL?" ―... in Him is all created ... and through
Him to reconcile all to Him ..."(Col. 1:16-20). The phrase "all things" is not
in the original Greek Text. It should simply read: "all," not "all things‖. It
is "faith" that we lack in believing these simple Scriptures!


After all of God's punishments and chastisements are meted out, all will be reconciled to
God. Death will be abolished (I Cor. 15:26), and all will be vivified and given
immortality never to be subject to pain, heartache, or death again. The Scriptures fully
substantiate this grand truth.

"For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
Who will have ALL men to be saved, and to come unto the
knowledge of the truth. For there is One God, and one mediator
between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Who gave Himself
a ransom for ALL to be testified in due time" (I Tim. 2:3-4).

"I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw ALL [Gk. "the" all] men unto
me" (John 12:32).

"That in the name of Jesus every knee should be bowing, celestial

and terrestrial and subterranean, and every tongue should be
acclaiming that Jesus Christ is Lord, for the glory of God, the
Father" (Phil. 2:10-11).

It wouldn't be "to the glory of God" if it were a forced acclimation. Besides I Cor.
12:3 plainly says, " ... no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the
holy spirit." To "acclaim" carries the connotation of a heartfelt, voluntary expression.

"For even as, in Adam, all are dying, thus also, in Christ, shall all be
vivified" (I Cor. 15:22).

"Vivified" is from the Greek: Zoopoieo = LIVE-DO, "giving life beyond the reach of
death, conferring immortality." The same "all" who are dying in Adam (which includes
everyone) is the same "all" that are vivified in Christ (which of necessity includes
everyone). Also notice that the "all" are vivified "in" Christ not "out" of Christ, and it's
not, "all in Christ are vivified," but rather, "in Christ ... ALL are
vivified." The order of words makes a giant difference.

"Consequently, then, as it was through one offense for all mankind

for condemnation, thus also it is through one just award
for all mankind for life's justifying. For even as, through the
disobedience of the one man, the many were constituted
sinners, thus also, through the obedience of the One, the many shall
be constituted just" (Rom. 5:19).

This is not a difficult verse to understand. One offense brought condemnation on all mankind
and all are constituted sinners. In the same manner ("thus also") through the obedience of the
One [Christ] the same "many" are constituted just!
"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the
Man Christ Jesus [sorry, no trinity here-or anywhere] who gave Himself a
ransom for ALL to be testified in due time" (I Tim. 2:5-6).

"For in Him [Christ] the entire complement delights to dwell, and

through Him to reconcile ALL to Him (making peace through the blood of His
cross), through Him, whether those on the earth or those in the
heavens" (Col. 1:20).

"If anyone's work shall be burned up, he will forfeit it, yet he shall
be saved, yet thus, as through fire" (I Cor. 3:15).

" ... we rely on the living God, Who is the Saviour of ALL mankind,
ESPECIALLY [but not exclusively] believers. These things be charging
and teaching" (I Tim. 4:10-11).
This verse implies that God saves all, but saves believers in some special sense.

"For God does not dispatch His Son into the world that He should be
judging the world, but that the world may be saved through
Him" (John 3:17).

" ... God, Who saves us and calls us with a holy calling, not in accord
with our acts, but in accord with His own purpose and the grace
which is given to us in Christ Jesus before times eonian [before the
world began-Authorized]" (II Tim. 1:9).

Man's salvation was assured before God ever created him. He knew all men would sin.
That's why He provided a Saviour. We are being saved by "grace" not by anything we do.

"No one can come to Me if ever the Father Who sends Me should not
be drawing him. And I shall be raising him in the last day"
(John 6:44).

It is not up to us or anyone to come to Christ. God does the choosing, calling, drawing, etc.

―... the kindness of God is leading you to repentance" (Rom. 2:4).

―... having this same confidence, that He Who undertakes a good

work among you, will be performing it until the day of Jesus
Christ" (Phil. 1:6).
"Now to Him Who is ABLE to guard you from tripping and to stand
you flawless in sight of His glory ...‖ (Jude 24).

―... if One died for the sake of all, consequently all died"
(II Cor. 5:14).

God applies Christ's death and sacrifice to "all men."

"But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for
the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that He by
the grace of God should taste death for EVERY man" (Heb. 2:9).

"And he [Christ] is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our sins
only, but also for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD" (I John 2:2).

Christ IS the propitiation for the sins of the whole world! How can you doubt it? How can
you teach contrary to it? He isn't "potentially" the propitiation for the sins of the world.
He IS the propitiation for the sins of the world.

"Yet all is of God, Who conciliates us to Himself through Christ, and

is giving us the dispensation of the conciliation, how that God was
in Christ, conciliating the world to Himself, not reckoning their
offenses to them, and placing in us the word of the conciliation"
(II Cor. 5:18-19).

This Scripture is clear. God through Christ's sacrifice (Christ's sacrifice carries a whole lot
more weight than you ever give Him credit for) is conciliating the whole world to Himself.
Do you know what that means? God is "at peace" with mankind. Yes, there are future
chastisements and punishments, but the end result has already been accomplished. What the
world must yet go through is for their good. But God already knows the end result. All will
be saved! However, only "we" have been given this word of reconciliation (that is any of us
"we" who believe it).

Notice that God is "not reckoning their offenses to them." Then who is God "reckoning
offenses" to? It is to Jesus Christ His Son that He is reckoning the sins of the world.
Vs. 21: "For He [God] hath made Him [Christ] to be SIN for us ... "

Look at this again. This is the Word of God. God is "NOT reckoning their [the whole world]
offenses to them" (Vs. 19)! He is not doing that. But He IS making His Son Jesus Christ "to
BE sin for us." How could God consign the vast majority of humanity to the eternal flames of
torture in Hell if He no longer reckons that they have any sins? Of what value is Christ's
sacrifice FOR them if they still have to pay their own penalty for all eternity? This verse is
talking about the WHOLE WORLD. The sins of the WHOLE WORLD.

But what if all these sinners of the world reject Christ? Of course most people do reject
Christ, but they won't always do so. God has not given them belief yet. Remember "every
knee will bow and every tongue will acclaim ... to the Glory of God." Of course most don't
will to believe God now, but they all will later.

" ... for it is GOD Who is operating in you to WILL as well as to work
for the sake of His delight" (Phil. 2:13).

"For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust

in the living God, who is the SAVIOUR OF ALL MEN" (I Tim. 4:10).

God is not the "potential" or "possible" saviour of all men. He is the saviour of all men! I
believe Him. I think you should too.

Vs. 11, "These things command and teach."

"Not one is seeking out God" (Rom. 3:11).

"Now what have you which you did not obtain? Now if you obtained
it also, why are you BOASTING as though NOT obtaining?"
(I Cor. 4::7).

―Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you ...‖ (John 15:16).

"No one can come to Me if ever the Father Who sends Me should not
be drawing him" (John 6:44).

―He [God] chooses us in Him [Christ] ...‖ (Eph. 1:4).

"Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of
the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered
the loss of all things, and do count them but DUNG, that I may win
Christ" (Phil. 3:8), King James Version.

With regards to elders and supervisors in the Church, Paul told Titus:

" ... for the supervisor must be unimpeachable as an administrator

of God, not given to self-gratification, not irritable, no toper, not
quarrelsome, not avaricious; but hospitable, fond of that which is
good, sane, just, benign, self-controlled; upholding the FAITHFUL
WORD according to the teaching, that he may be able to entreat
with SOUND TEACHING as well as to EXPOSE those who
CONTRADICT. For many are insubordinate, vain praters, and
imposters ... who must be GAGGED, who are subverting whole
households, teaching what they must not, on behalf of sordid
gain" (Titus 1:7-11. Concordant Literal New Testament).

I pray that some place in this long letter a little ember of light might have started glowing the
reader‘s spirit regarding the mountain of Scriptural references I have presented. One loses a
lot sometimes when one starts teaching the truths of God, but nothing is more valuable
than truth!

There are three great evils of men on earth today: corrupt government, false
science, and deceitful religion. Of these, the Christian doctrine of "Eternal
Torment" for the majority of God's children is by far the single greatest evil and
contemptible teaching ever foisted on the human race anywhere on the face of the earth, in
the entire history of the world!

As God wills in the years ahead, the truth concerning this and other Christian doctrines will
be made known for all to see. People will finally see this evil teaching for what it is: an anti-
Scriptural, anti-God, doctrine of demons, and Satan's greatest effort to blaspheme the very
name of God among the nations. And those who teach these evil lies will stand exposed
before all!

Now you know the word of GOD has been twisted centuries ago just after the APOSTLES
passed out, the word of God gets twisted even the more from the pulpit by our own Prophets,
Apostles, Pastors, Teachers, Evangelist and the worse of all is our Theologians. Most of these
errors we are encountering have come from Our LATIN brothers (CATHOLICS).

Christendom accuse the Catholic‘s of false doctrine practices yet we follow their belief, by
preaching (eternal torture in hell) and celebrating with them (Christmas and Easter) which the
apostles never did- just to mention a few. Some of us still love the Catholic‘s though because
the catholic‘s don‘t peddle the word of God, likewise the Jehovah witnesses but our own holy
ghost babies and their leaders become one and peddle the word of GOD. Remember Paul said
it‘s the majority that is peddling the word of GOD, and who are the majority?

2 Corinthians 2:17 "Unlike MANY PEOPLE, we are not in the habit

of MAKING PROFIT out of God‘s Message"(The Twentieth Century New

The Majority are not Atheists, not Pagans, not Moslems not Hindus not Sinners but the very
Christians that call upon the name of GOD every day. They are the Majority peddling the
word of GOD. Only a small number of people are finding the narrow road.

We are not saying that there is no lake of fire, there is...Jesus, Peter and Paul said it is painful
to go through this ―fire‖, so it‘s better to go through it now than later, even though there is
no partiality with God!!!.

Multitudes no doubt have rejected Jesus and gone into judgment and punishment. But this
punishment is not an endless, merciless torment. Rather it is a loving, beneficial, corrective
time of purification.

―The Lord disciplines those he loves, and he punishes everyone he

accepts as a son‖ (Heb 12: 6).
We read of those who receive the mark of the beast that they:
―will be tormented with fire and sulphur in the presence of the
holy angels and of the Lamb‖ (Rev 14: 10).

This is picture language and both fire and sulphur are cleansing agents. This purging takes
place in the loving, caring presence of Jesus. When that work is complete they too will come
to repentance and salvation through Jesus Christ and join the great multitude of the redeemed
and sing the praises of the saviour of all mankind.
Let‘s put on a measure of truth people of God. God should help us to understand this...


God‘s justice, as well as his wisdom, his love and his power, make the idea of infinite
punishment or eternal torment a total impossibility. Divine justice requires that a lifetime of
sin and disobedience and rejection of God should receive a punishment, and no doubt
a severe punishment; but every concept of biblical justice demands that it should
be limited and not endless.

The picture that now emerges from our study is not a hell of unmitigated, unending torment.
Rather it is a place of judgement for correction. We begin to see a loving Creator who is not
going to be content with his creatures until they are ultimately purged and cleansed of every
sin. He is taking infinite pains over their perfection. His purposes may be long in their
outworking, but in the end they will be perfectly accomplished.

Dear reader, have you ever considered the following scripture in truth:

Romans 8: 20 - 21: ‗For the creation was subjected to futility, not of

its own will, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the
creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into
the freedom of the glory of the children of God.‘

In this passage God clearly takes responsibility for the fall of creation. He subjected the
creation to futility in hope of its future deliverance. It was all part of his full creative plan. He
did not lose the first round in a conflict with Satan. He positively planned that events should
go that way. Think, please think well.

Ultimately we must see that God takes responsibility for evil and uses it to bring about his
purposes. In Isaiah 45 God states his sovereignty. He states that he has raised up Cyrus, a
heathen king, for his purposes. In verse 5 he says, ‗Besides Me there is no God.‘ In
verse 7 he adds, ‗the one forming light and creating darkness, causing
peace and creating evil; I am the Lord who does all these
things.‘ Some English versions read calamity rather than evil. Good and evil are not two
opposing forces, like white and black on the chessboard, striving for mastery of the universe.
God created all things including evil to serve his own purposes, and he is in total control.
The prophet Habakkuk wrestled with this problem. Read chapter 1 verses 5 and 6:
‗Look among the nations! Observe! Be astonished! Wonder! Because
I am doing something in your days - You would not believe if you
were told. For behold, I am raising up the Chaldeans, that fierce and
impetuous people ...‘ God raised up an evil people to work out his purposes of
judgement and correction for Israel. Habakkuk, like us, found it difficult to understand.

In Romans 9: 17, Paul quotes Exodus 9: 16 to state emphatically that God raised up
Pharaoh. Pharaoh is like Satan, holding the people of God in cruel bondage and captivity
until the deliverer comes to set them free. Paul goes on to state the absolute sovereignty of

When we start to see Satan and evil and wicked nations as tools in the hand of God for
working out his purposes, everything begins to make sense. God plunged the whole creation
down into sin that He might bring it up again having known evil and chosen good.

Job in his innocent integrity was certainly pleasing in the eyes of God. God‘s work however
was not complete. How much greater was Job‘s appreciation, love and understanding of God
after he had suffered. Like the whole creation, he had to go down before he could rise to a
greater height. In Jesus himself above all we see the same pattern. He came down by steps
from the greatest height to the lowest depths, before God raised Him again to the highest
glory at His right hand.

Do we encourage sinners to continue in their evil ways by taking away the threat of eternal
damnation? No! It remains ‗a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living
God‘ (Heb 10: 31). Better we go through the purification now than later. Paul was
constrained to be an ‗ambassador for Christ‘ not by the fear of hell, but by fear of the
Lord and by the love of Christ (2 Cor. 5: 11, 14, 20). We no longer see the human race
as hell-bound sinners most of whom will eventually be permanently written off. We see each
one as a creation of God for whom He has a purpose that will be accomplished.


DESTROYED: Is being destroyed a condition from which there is no salvation? Jesus

"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the
soul: but rather fear Him which is able to DESTROY both soul and
body in hell *the Greek is "Gehenna" NOT hell. It is ‘Gehenna fire,’ Mat. 5:22, not ‘hell
fire’+" (Matt. 10:28)

Is there no salvation from this "destruction" in Gehenna fire? Notice that they are not
"eternally lost" in Gehenna fire, but they are "DESTROYED" in gehenna fire. Their
condition is that of being DESTROYED. This is not a hopeless condition or even our own
Lord would have been put into a hopeless condition.

"Jesus answered and said unto them, DESTROY this temple, and in
three days I will raise it up ... but He spake of the temple of His
BODY" (John 2:19 & 21).

Later they did destroy Jesus Christ and sure enough three days later God SAVED Jesus
from that destruction.

Notice what Job said with relation to being "destroyed":

"Thine hands have made me and fashioned me together round

about; yet Thou dost DESTROY me" (Job 10:8).

Yet Job knew that God would yet save him. In Jeremiah 18 God tells Jeremiah to go
down to the Potter’s house and observe him at work. Jeremiah sees the potter destroy a
marred work in his hand and refashion it into something useful. This we learn is an analogy
of how God would "destroy" Judah (Vs. 7), and yet save him in the end. God will
refashion all of marred (destroyed) mankind into glorious sons of God!

Jesus told His disciples in a sermon that if they called a brother "fool" they would be in
danger of "Gehenna fire." What kind of danger is that? How does this Gehenna fire
actually judge us? Is there anywhere that we are told how Gehenna judges us to make
us "righteous?" There is a verse that specifically addresses what Gehenna accomplishes,
but it is one of the least understood verses in all Scripture:

"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the
soul: but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both soul and body
in hell [Gehenna fire]" (Matt. 10:28).

The biggest problem in understanding this verse, is to understand who this verse is talking
about. The Church will tell you that it is talking about those who will suffer loss of salvation
in the eternal fires of hell. Yet nothing could be further from the truth. This verse was
addressed directly to and about the 12 apostles, and is applied to all Christ's disciples
throughout all generations.

Go back to the first verse of chapter 10 for the contextual proof that Jesus is instructing his
Apostles only in this teaching: "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and
commanded them [no one else, just 'them,' just the twelve apostles], saying..." And
Jesus continues speaking unbroken all the way to the eleventh chapter, to His twelve
apostles only. Christians always talk about people taking phrases out of context yet they are
the worst of all, always looking for phrases to agree with their doctrine.
If it is the world of unrepentant sinners that are to "fear Him which is able to
destroy both soul and body in hell," then why didn't Jesus make this clear to His
apostles in these verses? But no, Jesus warned His apostles that they are to be the ones
fearing. Notice:

"...He called unto Himself His twelve disciples... These twelve Jesus
sent forth and commanded them saying...[Jesus continues speaking to His
apostles only] ...And fear not them [their enemies and persecutors] which kill the
body [their body; your body], but are not able to kill the soul [your soul]: but
rather fear Him [you twelve apostles] which is able to DESTROY both soul
and body [both YOUR soul and YOUR body] in hell [Gehenna fire]" (Matt. 10:1, 5,
& 28).

Assuredly, Jesus was not warning the wicked to not fear the wicked who, when they kill
the wicked cannot kill the soul... No, this instruction is for believers.

Gehenna is judgment. It is not torture in literal fire. It is judgment upon God's Elect to
spiritually purify them; to make them holy and blameless; and to make them strong.
Gehenna speaks of judgment, and Jesus taught that God is "able to destroy both
soul and body in Gehenna." How are we (God's Elect) presently being destroyed in
both body and soul? Notice what Jesus said a few verses after He made this statement:

"He that finds his life [Gk: 'psuche' - soul, not zoe which is life] shall lose it:
and he that loses his life [soul] for My sake shall find it" (Matt. 10:39).
King James loves to swap words which are different in meaning just to make a sentence
doctrinally sound.

We must be spiritually baptized into Christ's death, and we must also LOSE OUR SOUL for
Christ's sake.

Learn to read Scriptures accurately and precisely. Take note that Jesus did NOT say "And
fear not them which KILL the body, but are not able to KILL the
soul, but rather fear Him which is able to KILL both soul and body in
hell [Gk: Gehenna]." No, Jesus did NOT say that, but it is assumed that He either said that
or at least meant that. No, He did not. Jesus said: "And fear not them which KILL
the body, but are not able to KILL the soul, but rather fear Him
which is able to DESTROY both soul and body in hell [Gk: Gehenna]."
Why the switch? Jesus switches from "kill" to "destroy."

It is our "soul" that God is more interested in than our "life." An insane person may have
a perfectly healthy life, but his soul is severely damaged. A comatose (coma, tired or
drunken state) person may be in perfect physical health and be very much "alive," but
possesses virtually no soul-conscious awareness, character, love, emotions, knowledge,
hopes and dreams, memories, etc.
Now then, "destroy" in Vs. 28 is the Greek word 'appolumi' and it means: DESTROY,
PERISH, LOSE. Wow! Are you seeing this? How much easier it would have been for us if only
the translators had been consistent, but God didn't want them to be consistent. Jesus says
that God can "appolumi your body and soul." In verse 39 Jesus tells us that we
must "appolumi our own soul." Either we 'appolumi' -destroy/lose our souls,
or God will 'appolumi' our souls for us, and that is not the way we want to go, seeing
that: "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the Living
God" (Heb. 10:31).

And notice this is precisely what we read in Matt. 5:29- "If your right eye
offend you [then YOU] pluck it out... And if your right hand
offend you [then YOU] cut it off... and not that your whole body should
be cast [by GOD, 'fear HIM'] into Gehenna"(Matt. 5:28-30).

We must pluck out and cut off those members of the body which are used to sin against

"Mortify therefore your members [Gk: 'melos' -'parts of the BODY' -Dr.
Strong] which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate
affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
For which things' sake the wrath of God comes ['fear HIM'] on the
children of disobedience: In the which ye also walked some time,
when ye lived in them. But now ye also put off all these; anger,
wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth.
Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with
his deeds; And have put on the new man, which is renewed in
knowledge after the Image of Him that created him [it]" (Col. 3:5-10).

But hopefully by now, we all know that the different "members" of our body [pluck out
your eye; cut off your hand; cut off your foot] do not actually sin, but it is the heart and
carnal mind of man that uses the members of his body to commit sin: "Neither yield
you your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto
sin..." (Rom. 6:13).

So then God teaches us to "fear HIM" and in so doing, DESTROY [Gk: 'apollumi' -
destroy, perish, lose] our soul by "PLUCKING OUT AND CUTTING OFF " these
members of our body so as to stop using them as "instruments of
unrighteousness unto sin" so that God will not have to "destroy both our
body and our soul in Gehenna" by "CASTING us into Gehenna." Are you
beginning to understand the judgment of "Gehenna fire" (but that won’t be for
eternity) and how it works?
PERISHED: Can a person perish and still be saved? Of course. Even "righteous" men can
"All things have I seen in the days of my vanity: there is a JUST
MAN that PERISHES in his righteousness, and there is a wicked man
that prolongs his life in his wickedness" (Ecc. 7:15).

One more,
"The RIGHTEOUS PERISHES, and no man lays it to heart..."
(Isa. 57:1).

Perishing is not something that can cut off God’s arm of salvation.

LOST: Can a person sin, be lost, die, and then be saved? Certainly. Let’s look at one of
those parables of Jesus that Christendom thinks of as easy to understand little stories, when
in fact they don’t even begin to understand. You all know the story contained in the parable
of the Prodigal son so I won’t read it all, but let me give you the "truth" of this parable.
God is the "Father" in this parable, and the Prodigal is EVERY SON WHO HAS GONE ASTRAY.

"And when he had spent all ... And when he came to himself ... I will
arise and go to my father ... I have sinned against heaven, and in thy
sight ... And am no more worthy to be called thy son ... But the
father said to his servants, Bring forth the best robe, and put it on
him, and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet. And bring
hither the fatted calf ... For this my son was DEAD, and is alive
again; he was LOST, and is found. And they began to be
merry" (Luke 15:14-23).

This man SINNED, he was LOST, and he SPIRITUALLY DIED! Do we ALL spiritually DIE? "AND
AS IT IS APPOINTED UNTO MEN ONCE TO DIE..." But isn’t this speaking of
the PHYSICAL death of our bodies? No it is not. The second part of the verse gives us the
answer as to which death this is,
"And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but AFTER this
the JUDGMENT" (Heb. 9:27).

Notice that "judgment" comes after this death, and not before. We know that
JUDGMENT is upon the house of God NOW! Each individual Christian in every generation is
judged NOW, in THIS life, BEFORE he physically dies! And so the "death" that all men must
partake of before judgment is SPIRITUAL DEATH. Notice:

"And I saw THE DEAD, small and great, STAND before God"
(Rev. 20:12).

How pray tell can the physically dead, stand, if they are dead?
So here then is the order of things. The Prodigal Son SINNED, he was LOST, he spiritually
DIED, and then? And then he was JUDGED! Where and when was he judged? In the hog
pens of a far alien country, that’s where. God had to bring him out of this alien county
(Mystery Babylon the Great) with all its "riotous living" (Luke 15:13). And so it was
that God JUDGED this Prodigal with the beasts and swine of Babylon until he "came to
himself." (Vs. 17).

Seems to me that God sent King Nebuchadnezzar into the fields with the beasts to live like a
beast, so that he too "came to himself." God has not warned in vain to "Come out of
THE EARTH] my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye
receive not of her plagues" (Rev. 17:5 & 18:4).
He that has an ear let him hear.

And so this Prodigal SINNED, was LOST, and spiritually DIED. Surely he is outside of the
realm of salvation now. No, he is in the perfect realm FOR SALVATION. How many millions
of times this parable of the Prodigal Son has been read, but how many times has its truth
ever been understood and perceived? This prodigal was, according to his
father, "DEAD." And it was after his father said that he was "dead" that he welcomed
him back, forgave him, exalted him, and rewarded him! Now who says one can‘t
be saved after death. It is after death that most of humanity will be SAVED. Grow
up holy ghost babies!

May God finally grant you his spiritual wisdom to SEE SOMETHING SPIRITUAL! Parables are
NOT literal, that’s why they are called "parables" instead of "history." Here is the wages of
riotous and carnal living in the hog pens of Babylon: "For the wages of sin is
DEATH..." (Rom. 6:23). SPIRITUAL DEATH! What must happen AFTER we spiritually
DIE? "JUDGMENT!" The spiritual DEAD must be JUDGED. Does judging CORRECT
the spiritually dead sinners? Yes it does. That is what the parable of the Prodigal
Son is all about. God’s "ways and means" ALWAYS WORK!

"...For when Thy *God’s+ JUDGMENTS are in the earth, the

(Isa. 26:9)!


I did talk about misused of the word ―punishment‖ earlier on but I want to discuss it
properly at this stage. While considering all of the hellfire and brimstone material
disseminated by Christian teachers, preachers, writers, and educators around the world, just
how many hundreds of times do you suppose the word "punishment" is used in the
entire New Testament with regards to sinners? Hundreds? Would you believe less than
fifty? Would you believe less than ten? Would you believe ONCE? That’s right, the answer is
one time.
"Of how much more punishment [Gk: timoria], suppose you, shall he be
thought worthy, who has trodden underfoot the Son of God, and has
counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an
unholy thing, and has done despite unto the Spirit of grace?"
(Heb. 10:29).

I can assure you that those who have committed the above crime towards the Lord are few
indeed. Most of humanity that will be judged in the lake of fire has NEVER EVEN HEARD of
Jesus Christ, let alone, "trodden underfoot the Son of God, and counted the blood of the
covenant, an UNHOLY thing, and done DESPITE unto the Spirit of grace." Most have never
even heard of such sins, let alone committed them.

This is a most powerful Scripture to be sure, but it does not speak

of "eternal" punishment, and it is the ONLY SCRIPTURE IN THE ENTIRETY OF THE NEW
TESTAMENT that uses the word "punishment" with reference to punishing sinners!

There are three other places in the KJV that the word "punish" or "punished" is used
correctly. They are Acts 4:21; 22:5; and 26:11 where Saul (later Paul) is punishing not
sinners, but members of the church, the followers of Christ.

II Thes. 1:9 should be translated, "eonian extermination" and not "punished

... everlasting."

II Peter 2:4 & 9 should both be "chastening" as it is the same Greek

word kolazo and not timoria which means punish.

The KJV uses "punished" in verse nine, which should be "chasten," and ironically it
doesn’t even translate the Greek word kolazo (chasten) in verse four -- the KJV translators
left it out completely. I suppose the translators thought that it was redundant to
say, "chastening judging." But then again, they didn’t bother to look at II Cor.
2:6 which should read "rebuke" (another Greek word, epitimia), not "punish."
And lastly, I Pet. 2:14 should read "vengeance" (still another Greek
word, kdikesise), and not punishment.

So in the case of "punishment" we have but ONE Scripture to deal with.

Even among those who love the doctrine of eternal torment, no Scripture in the Old
Testament has ever been brought forth which even vaguely defends their theory.

For all those who have never heard the real Gospel of God, here it is:

"How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that brings
good tidings, that publish peace; that brings GOOD TIDINGS [that
means gospel] of GOOD [not evil tidings of a Lord who administers infinite acts of eternal
terrorism], that publishes SALVATION [not DAMNATION] ... The LORD hath
made bare His holy arm in the eyes of ALL THE NATIONS *that’s the
whole world], and ALL THE ENDS OF THE EARTH [that’s everyone+ SHALL

I am wondering if most of my readers have ever even heard of this verse or knew that it is in
their Bibles.

Now I am aware of the many Scriptures that speak of death, destruction, and perishing of
wicked people. And we won’t forget the one Scripture with regards to punishment. All those
Scriptures are true. They are not, however, God’s final judgment on the wicked. The final
judgments of God will bring salvation to ALL and there are no scriptures that contradict
those saving declarations of Almighty God. God has declared it; He has spoken it; His Word
has gone forth: He has willed:
"Who WILL have ALL men to be SAVED and to come unto the
knowledge of the truth" (I Tim. 2:4).

Here then is a declaration of God from His own inspired Word. It is found in all Bibles and in
all languages on earth for all to see and believe. But the Church of Babylon has tried to
destroy this declaration and make it of no effect in the minds of millions and millions of
people around the world. They teach that this verse and declaration of Almighty God WILL
NEVER EVER HAPPEN! Well, be it known, that they LIE!

Here’s what God says about His own words and His own declarations:
Tim. 2:4 and a hundred Scriptures like it]; it shall NOT return unto me
void [unfruitful, negated, ineffective, ineffectual, inoperative, invalid, null, worthless, vain,
IT SHALL PROSPER [bear fruit, benefit, do well, flourish, increase, multiply, progress,
make good] in the thing whereto I sent it" (Isaiah 55:11).

Most people don’t know what the preacher teach, they only copy from the tele/radio
evangelist and preach the same thing, the fact that BENNY HINN teaches it does not make it
right. The fact that the whole world teaches it does not make it right. The narrow gate,
only few are finding it not the majority.
Remember the former things of old: For I am God, and there is none
I AM GOD, and there is none like Me, "Telling from the BEGINNING,
the HEREAFTER, And from AFORETIME, what has NOT YET been
DESIRE WILL I DO. Calling from the sunrise, a bird of prey,
From a land far off, the man of My counsel. Indeed, I SPEAK!
IT" (Isaiah 46:9-11).

Nothing can hinder God’s words or declarations. Even the things that are perceived to be
hindrances to God’s will (such as the lake of fire and the second death), are not hindrances
at all, but rather are the very instruments for the accomplishment of His will. God has a ONE


"For whom the Lord loves He CHASTENS..." (Heb. 12:6).

There is no escaping it. If you are to be a "son of God" you will be chastened. The
word "chastened" is paideuo, and is not too severe. Even if involving some
punishment, the whole thrust of the word is to train, educate, discipline, prune,
instruct, etc. These are all good things not to be feared. But there is more, so we might
just as well read it and get our attitudes adjusted to it. The rest of the verse:
"For whom the Lord loves He CHASTENS,
and [AND] ...SCOURGES every son whom He receives [or is
assenting]"(Heb. 12:6).

"SCOURGES?" No, not scourging! Does God show His love toward us by scourging us? It
is absolutely necessary. Scourging is definitely even more severe and harsh than chastening.
The word "scourge" in Heb. 12:6 is from the Greek word mastigoo and here’s its
definition: "to flog (literally or figuratively) -- scourge" Strong’s Greek Dictionary, page 46.
And what does "flog" mean?

"flog 1. To beat severely with a whip or rod." Page 531 American heritage College

This word "scourge" in Heb. 12:6 which God performs on us, is the very same word
found in John 19:1 where it says they took Jesus and "scourged" Him. Now then, will
God literally "BEAT SEVERELY WITH A WHIP OR ROD" every son that He receives? No, not
necessarily, even though they did literally do so to Paul and many other followers of Jesus
Christ. Remember that the definition said it can be "literal OR figurative."

Many people have come to know Christ in their senior years, and God does not literally beat
every little old lady with whips and rods when they turn to Him. However, the chastening of
God’s grace in Titus 2:11 can certainly seem like a real flogging. God will chasten us until
He drives out the beast in us. Although we are not condemned when God judges us, we
nonetheless must be chastened.

"If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for
what son is he whom the father chastens not? But if you be without
chastisement, whereof ALL are partakers, then are you bastards,
and NOT sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which
corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much
rather be in subjection into the Father of spirits, and live? For they
verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but He
for OUR PROFIT, that we might be partakers of His holiness. Now no
chastening for the present seems to be joyous, but GRIEVOUS:
nevertheless afterward it yields the PEACEABLE FRUIT OF
RIGHTEOUSNESS unto them which are exercised thereby"
(Heb. 12:7--11).

So it is essential that we accept God’s chastisement which is how He "judges" us.

The reason we are not "condemned" with the world is because we accept God’s
judgment in our lives.

"There is therefore now NO CONDEMNATION to them which are in

Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the
Spirit" (Rom. 8:1).

But can we compare the judging that believers go through with the judging that the wicked
receive at the end of the age in the lake of fire. Surely there is no comparison, is there?
Trust me when I say, "For there is no respect [Gk: partiality] of persons with
God" (Rom. 2:11).

 Doesn’t the "second death" part of the "lake of fire" seal their fate forever?
 Isn’t it true that God will never, ever pressure anyone to accept Jesus Christ?
 Isn’t it true that even God Himself doesn’t know why some people reject His Sacrifice?
 Didn’t God predestine us to be saved but predestined those in the lake of fire to be
 Isn’t the reason why some people choose Christ and others Reject Christ an eternal
 Is there something about death itself that prevents God from saving a non-believer after
 Does Rom. 8:38-19 substantiate the teaching that death separates God from sinners,
 Isn’t the lake of fire the most dreadful thing that God Almighty has ever created?
 Will billions of sinners purposely choose to be tortured in fire forever rather than accept
 Let’s face it, isn’t the lake of fire something we will never understand until it comes?
 Is God as stupid and depraved as the theologians who try to bring Him down to their level?
I will now answer all these questions in order: No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, and

Keep these scriptures in mind.

"And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that
wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had
received the mark of the beast [what is THAT?], and them that
worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire
burning with brimstone [does brimstone make the lake of fire burn HOTTER? Is fire
without brimstone not hot enough to burn and torture human flesh?]" (Rev. 19:20).

"And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire [I
thought a lake contains water] and brimstone, where the beast and the false
prophet are, and shall be tormented [does that mean TORTURED?
Can spirit beings be tormented by physical fire?] day and night *but there shall be ‘NO
NIGHT’, 20:25] for ever and ever *how long is THAT? Is ‘ever AND ever’ something
like TWICE as long as eternity?]" (Rev. 20:10).

"And I saw a great white [not BLACK] throne, and Him that sat on it,
from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away [where did they
GO?]; and there was found no place for them [if this is literal, then where did
God PUT THEM?]" (Rev. 20:11).

"And I saw the dead, small and great, stand [stand WHERE, both the heavens
AND THE EARTH ‘fled away’ Vs. 11] before God; and the books [are these books
like a daily DIARY from Waterston Bookstore?] Were opened: and another book
was opened, which is the book of life [why is this only ONE book?]: and the
dead were judged out of those things which were written in the
books, according to their works" (Rev. 20:12).

"And the sea gave up the dead which were in it [is this speaking of dead
sailors who drowned in the ocean?]; and death and hell delivered up the dead
which were in them [is death and hell a place or a realm? And how can HELL deliver
up their DEAD -- we are assured by Christendom that those in hell are VERY MUCH ALIVE
and SUFFERING?]: and the dead were judged [does judge mean SENTENCED TO
HELL FOR EVER?] every man according to their works" (Rev. 20:13).
"And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire [wait just a minute;
Christendom tells us that death {separation from God} and hell represent what the lake of
fire actually IS, so how pray tell can they be cast INTO the lake of fire?]. This is the
second death [Ah, here is the real key to understand this whole enigma - -the SECOND
death is not a repeat performance of the FIRST death]" (Rev. 20:14).

"And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast
into the lake of fire [where they are BURNED UP? TORTURED FOR ETERNITY? Or
JUDGED -- - RIGHT?]" (Rev. 20:15).

"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and

murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all
liars, shall have their part in the lake of fire which burneth with fire
and brimstone: which is the second death" (Rev. 21:8).

One can check a hundred translations of the Bible, and there will be little deviation from the
verses cited above. The King James Version is about as accurate a translation of these verses
as there is. Most versions are very close to the KJV, word for word. But there are about a
dozen Bible Translations that differ most significantly on five little words. The most heretical
and damning doctrines of Christendom completely melt away with a proper translation of
these five little words: eis tous [for the] aionas ton [of the] aionon. So we
have "for the (something?) Of the (something?)."

Now that we know what the olam , aion and the aionon is, we should understand all
verses and scriptures that uses eternity, evermore, ever and ever, and
everlasting. All we have to do is to replace them with the proper word and have a
proper translation and that takes away the contradiction of scriptures we listed from the
beginning of this letter.

Now we learned from Scripture that if we would volunteer to have God judge us now that
we would not need to be condemned with the world in the lake of fire. And Peter tells us
that this judgment (like the one the Thessalonians were going through) must begin at the
HOUSE OF GOD. We saw that it involves much tribulation, sorrow, affliction and suffering.
These things are God’s judgment on believers to try their hearts and prove them worthy for
the Kingdom of God. Christ told us that if we do not forsake all (even give our very bodies as
a living Sacrifice, according to Paul) and take up OUR cross and follow Christ into
persecutions that start in our own household, then He doesn’t want us in the kingdom with
Him -- we are NOT WORTHY (at this time)!

Now if you are following these Scriptures closely you will see that we are to give our bodies
as a living sacrifice and endure suffering, affliction, and persecution. But there is MORE! Oh
NO, how much more can we take? What else? TRIALS. There are trials! The word "trial" in
the New Testament is translated from the Greek word dokimion and means TESTING.
God is going to TEST us. Are you excited about that? However, We must go through it. Peter
tells us the many trials and temptations are heaviness to our hearts, but because we know
why we are going through it, we can, nevertheless, REJOICE!

"Wherein ye GREATLY REJOICE, though now for a season, if need

(I Peter 1:6).

Ah, yes, how sweet it is in the mouth (REJOICE), but how bitter it is in the belly
(HEAVINESS) (Rev. 10:10). But say, did you notice how LONG these trials last? For
eternity? Or for "a season"? Remember there is NO partiality with God. As we have studied
earlier on, those in the final judgment of lake of fire will also be there for just "a
season" not eternally!
God should help us to understand...



"If you be reproached [insulted] for the name of Christ, happy are you...
yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let
him glorify God on this behalf, for the time is come that judgment
must begin at the house of God..." (I Pet. 4:14, 16-17).

We must all receive reproaches from men, but judgment from God. And God purges
us from the offenses of our carnal mind by "His Divine consuming FIRE"
(Heb. 12:29).

The word "fire" is used with reference to Judgment many times in Scripture: "Gehenna
fire," "salted with fire," "furnace of fire," "unquenchable fire,"
"everlasting fire," "burn by fire," "baptism by fire," "coals of fire,"
"flaming fire," "eternal fire," "consuming fire."

Are all of these Scriptural uses of fire really literal, physical, descriptions of how God will
torture most of humanity as depicted in this Medieval Christian Art?

Here are the New Testament Scriptures which speak of different "fires" by which men are

"That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of Gold
that perishes, though it be tried in the fire[Christ's 'Gehenna fire'], might
be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus
Christ" (I Pet. 1:7).

"Faith" is intangible and as such cannot be "tried" in literal fire. The Greek word
translated fire is pur, and it means "fire" (literal or figuratively)-Strong's #4442
Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare
it, because it shall be revealed by FIRE; and the FIRE shall try every
man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he has
built there upon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall
be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved, yet
as BY FIRE" (I Cor. 3:13-15).

Again fire (Gk; pur) is used figuratively, because the one being tried, "...he
himself shall be saved, yet as BY FIRE." If one is "saved by fire," he is
not eternally tortured in fire. Come on people wake up from your long slumber!

"I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but He [Jesus] that
comes after me is mightier than I, Whose shoes I am not worthy to
bear: He shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit [that's good], and with
fire [that's also good]" (Matt. 3:11).

Here, being baptized (immersed) in fire [pur] is as important and beneficial as being
baptized with God's Holy Spirit.

"Whose fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly purge

His [threshing] floor, and gather His wheat [wheat is good] into the garner,
but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire" (Matt. 3:12).

Chaff is the bracts enclosing the good, mature wheat, which is removed during
threshing-it has no value as food, and so is burned like the wood, hay, and stubble
of I Cor. 3:12. The Elect are composed of both the valuable wheat and the
worthless chaff, but we are not the tares. Notice that the chaff is "burned up...
with unquenchable fire." If this "unquenchable fire" "burns up" the chaff, surely
it cannot be eternal. Unquenchable has nothing to do with eternal. Unquenchable
fires are Scriptures that are not allowed to be quenched before they are allowed to
burn themselves out.

Winnowing Wheat

"He will gather His wheat... but He will burn up the chaff"
(Matt. 3:12).
We are the wheat of Jesus' parable, and we have unwanted chaff surrounding our
lives. Jesus is not likening some people to wheat and others to chaff. The wheat is
not one group and the chaff another, but rather the unwanted chaff belongs to the
desired wheat. The wheat is the baby and the chaff is the bath water. We do not
throw away the baby with the bath water, but we do throw away the dirty bath water
(in this analogy the bath water represents chaff which is burned in fire).

"For every one shall be salted with fire and every sacrifice shall be
salted with salt" (Mark 9:49, See Rom. 12:1-we are that sacrifice).
Fire purifies and burns up unwanted character traits likened to "straw,
hay, and stubble" and also to "chaff." But Salt is a preservative. Hence the salt
and the fire. The spiritual fire purifies us and the spiritual salt
preserves us.

"And He said unto His disciples... I am come to send fire on the

earth: and what will I, if it be already kindled [in His disciples, generation
by generation, in this church age, NOW]?" (Luke 12:22 & 49).

How can anyone suggest that the different "fires" of which Jesus speaks are
literal? What LITERAL FIRE did Jesus set back in Palestine during His ministry? Did
He burn down some town or city? Did He start a forest fire. Well, He said the fire
sent on the earth was "already kindled" during this period of His ministry. When
will the Church give up this literal nonsense concerning the spiritual fire of God's
spirit with which he will purify all humanity beginning with His Own House?

"It is the spirit that quickens [gives life] the flesh [letter] profits nothing:
the WORDS [wheat, chaff, tares, seed, fish, leaven, light, salt, rock, sand, wine,
treasure, sons, harvest, Samaritan, physician, sheep, pearl, servants, trees, virgins,
talents, vineyards, wedding, supper, coin, talents] are SPIRIT and they are
LIFE" (John 6:63).

And here is the second witness to this Scriptural truth:

"Who also has made us able ministers of the New Covenant; not of
the letter [flesh or written code], but of the spirit for the letter [written
code] kills, but the spirit gives life" (II Cor. 3:6).

Now understand that when Jesus says His words are spirit, He is not saying that
each individual phonetically sounded syllable is literally spirit, but the meaning and
understanding of His STATEMENTS are spirit. Just a few verses earlier Jesus
made a statement that prompted His declaration that "the words that I speak
unto you, they are spirit."

Here is what He said:

"For my flesh is meat [food/bread] indeed; and my blood is drink
indeed. He that eats My flesh, and drinks My blood, dwells in Me,
and I in him" (John 6:55-56).

The words meat and blood are no more "spirit" than is the word poison. But when
used to represent "Jesus," Jesus being the bread from heaven, THEN it
becomes spirit. Jesus is (spirit) bread that will ultimately impart immortality to those
who (spiritually) eat it.

So when the Scriptures tell us, "For our God is a consuming fire" (Heb.
12:29), can't we understand that these words are "spirit?" God is
SPIRIT..." (John 4:24). "...the INVISIBLE God..." (Col. 1:15). Now how
can God be visible fire, when we are plainly told and shown in many Scriptures that
God is invisible spirit? This phrase, "For our God is a consuming fire," is not
literal, so as to contradict the rest of Scripture, but rather is a spiritual statement-the
words are literal words, but the statement, the declaration, is spirit. God, as invisible
Spirit, spiritually burns up the spiritual wood, hay, straw, and carnality of the human
heart, in a similar way that literal fire burns up these physical materials.
All these "fires" are the same Fire: GOD IS THIS CONSUMING FIRE!

Jesus' judgments are upon His disciples, in this Church age, not upon the wicked
and non-believers of the world. Their time is coming, but not in this age.


The Church would have us believe that the world and all of its wicked people who
have passed on are being judged today, and every day. That as people live and die,
if they are not "saved," they are immediately judged and go to hell. Isn't that what
they teach? You know that is what they teach. It‘s Bogus and Nonsense!

Is Saddam Hussein, right now, in Hell? Ask your Pastor; ask your teacher; ask your
preacher; ask your priest? If anyone is burning in Hell right now, then that person
has already been judged. It was in the Egyptian hell of Amenti where the dead were
judged at death, not some future "day of judgment." And so Christendom has
rejected the Word of God for the pagan customs of the Egyptians. Ask you Pastors
why God "has appointed A DAY IN THE WHICH He will judge the world
in righteousness" (Acts 17:31) if the dead are judged immediately upon death
just as taught by the pagan Egyptians?

"Because He has appointed a day, in the which He will [even in Paul's

day it was still a future time] judge the world in righteousness by that Man
Whom He has ordained: whereof He has given assurance unto all
men, in that He has raised Him from the dead" (Acts 17:31).

This is Paul teaching the Athenians [pagan Greeks] that there is yet coming a day of
judgment on this world. Did it already come many years after Christ's resurrection
when Paul was teaching these Greeks? NO. Does anyone have a problem with the
phrase, "in the which He WILL [future tense] judge the world?" Two
thousand years later that appointed day has not yet arrived. But there is another
judgment which did arrive two thousand years ago:

God will help us to understand.

"Eonian life" is life for the eons or life for the ages. However long the eons or ages
are, that is how long eonian or age-abiding life is. Then what?

Here's why unlearned theologians say this is not possible, because after the ages or
eons, we would all die. NOT TRUE!

Let me illustrate. Suppose your company is going to buy you and everyone in your
company an all-expense paid trip to Europe for one month. EVERYBODY gets that
trip. However, because you are such a fabulous worker and such an asset to the
company, your boss is going to send you on a trip to Europe for three whole weeks
BEFORE everyone else goes on their trip. This is a SPECIAL, BONUS trip. Not
many get to go on THIS particular bonus trip, only a few.
Now then, you get to go THREE WEEKS earlier than the rest. When they arrive, you
have already been there enjoying yourself for THREE WEEKS. So when the others
arrive to begin their vacation, does your vacation END? No. Only your "three week"
vacation ends. But you CONTINUE to vacation in Europe just as long as the rest.
Your hotel reservation is not cancelled after three weeks.

That is not a perfect illustration, but maybe you get the point. "Aionion" or "Age-
lasting life" is a SPECIAL gift from God that only a relatively FEW ever receive. It
is LIFE in God's Kingdom BEFORE the masses are brought into God's Kingdom.
What allows those who are given "eonian life" to continue living even AFTER the
eons are past, is not the promise from God of "eternal life" but rather

All of God's children will be given immortality and incorruption, so that they
will never die. However, those who are given immortality before the rest, receive it
ages or eons in advance of the rest.




KJV has: the end of the
Heb.9:26 conclusion of the eons

consummations of the KJV has: the ends

eons of the world
KJV has: the end of
Matt.24:3 conclusion of the eon
the world

It is possible that your Bible does not use the word "eon" or "age" for the Greek
word ―aion.‖ It may use ―world.‖ I realize this gets confusing but God is not the author of
confusion. Man is.

Here is Hebrews 9:26 from some very well respected Bibles:

Hebrews 9:26: (since it was necessary for him often to have suffered from a laying down
of a world;) now but once for all at an end of the ages, for a removal of
sin by means of the sacrifice of himself he has manifested. (Diaglott)

Hebrews 9:26: Else had it been needful for him, ofttimes, to suffer,
from the foundation of the world; but, now, once for all, upon
a conjunction of the ages, for a setting aside of sin through means of
his sacrifice, hath he been made manifest; (Rotherham)

Hebrews 9:26: For then he ought to have suffered often from the
beginning of the world: but now once at the end of ages, he hath
appeared for the destruction of sin, by the sacrifice of
himself. (Darby)

Hebrews 9:26: or else he must have suffered often since the

foundation of the world. But now once at the end of the ages, he has
been revealed to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. (HNV)

Hebrews 9:26: for then he must have often sufferance since the
foundation of the world: but now, once, at the conclusion of the
ages, he has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of
himself. (LO)

Hebrews 9:26: or else he must have suffered often since the

foundation of the world. But now once at the end of the ages, he has
been revealed to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. (WEB)

Hebrews 9:26: In that case Christ would have needed to suffer many
times, from the creation of the world onwards; but as a matter of
fact He has appeared once for all, at the Close of the Ages, in order
to do away with sin by the sacrifice of Himself. (Weymouth)
Hebrews 9:26: since it had behoved him many times to suffer from
the foundation of the world, but now once, at the full end of the
ages, for putting away of sin through his sacrifice, he hath been
manifested; (YLT)

Hebrews 9:26: since then He must often be suffering from the

disruption of the world, yet now, once at the conclusion of the eons,
for the repudiation of sin through His sacrifice, is He
manifest (Concordant Literal New Testament).

So we see that sin will be repudiated or put away when all the eons otherwise
called "ages" come to an end.

Please note that the KJV mistranslated this verse like this:

Do you see the mistake? Where they translated "end of the world" the
word ―world‖ was translated as if it were singular in the KJV but the Greek word is plural
for ―aeons.‖ Not only is that but the Greek word for ―world‖ really ―kosmos.‖ The
KJV translated kosmos correctly in the first part of the verse as ―world‖ but in the second
part they translated the plural aiwnwn (eons) as ―world‖ also! Now do you see why
people are so confused on this issue of the eons/ages ending? If the Bible was a radio and the
translators were electricians, their radio would never work because it would have short
circuited long long ago! NONSENSE!

1Corinthians 10:11 is another verse which shows that the eons end:

1 Corinthians 10:11: These things and all types happened to them;

was written and for admonition of us, on whom the ends of the
ages met. (Diaglott)

1 Corinthians 10:11: These things happened to them by way of

warning, and were recorded to serve as a caution to us, in whose
days the close of the ages has come. (Twenty)
1 Corinthians 10:11: But, these things, by way of type, were
happening unto them, and were written with a view to our
admonition, unto whom, the ends of the ages, have reached
along. (Rotherham)

1 Corinthians 10:11: Now these things happened unto them by way

of example; and they were written for our admonition, upon
whom the ends of the ages are come. (ASV)

1 Corinthians 10:11: Now all these things happened to them as

types, and have been written for our admonition, upon whom the
ends of the ages are come. (Darby)

1 Corinthians 10:11: Now all these things happened to them by way

of example, and they were written for our admonition, on whom the
ends of the ages have come. (HNV)

Notice again how the KJV translators messed up? The Greek word "Kosmos" does not
appear anywhere in 1 Corinthians 10:11. Therefore the word ―world‖ should not
appear either. The Greek word that IS in 1 Corinthians 10:11 is aiwnwn is the plural
form of "aiwn" and should be "eons" or "ages." It should not be translated as ―ends
of the world‖ but ―ends of the eons or ages.‖

1 Corinthians 10:11: Now, all these things happened to them as

types; and are written for our admonition, on whom the ends of the
ages are come. (LO)

1 Corinthians 10:11: Now all these things happened to them by way

of example, and they were written for our admonition, on whom the
ends of the ages have come. (WEB)

1 Corinthians 10:11: All this kept happening to them with a figurative

meaning; but it was put on record by way of admonition to us upon
whom the ends of the Ages have come. (Weymouth)
1 Corinthians 10:11: And all these things as types did happen to
those persons, and they were written for our admonition, to
whom the end of the ages did come, (Young Literal Translation)

1Corinthians 10:11: Now all this befalls them typically. Yet it was
written for our admonition, to whom the consummations of the
eons have attained (Concordant Literal Translation)

The eons will end. When the eons end, God‘s goal is to ―vivify‖ or give immortality to all
mankind, subject all mankind to Christ and be All in all mankind (1 Cor.15:22-28), and
have all in the heavens and on the earth reconciled to Him (Col.1:20), and have all in the
heavens and all on the earth headed up in the Christ (Eph.1:10), and justify all
mankind (Romans 5:18), and make all mankind righteous (Romans 5:19).
These things have already attained to the believer so in essence the consummations of the
eons have attained to us per 1 Corinthians 10:11.

So since the eons do in fact end, and since the Greek word aiwnwn or "eonian" is that
which pertains to the eons, then we know that eonian cannot have the meaning
of ―eternal.‖ The only way ―eonian‖ could have the meaning of ―eternal‖ would be if
the word ―eon‖ meant eternal. Since no eon is eternal then that which is eonian cannot
be pertaining to that which is eternal.

Since no eon can be eternal (since they all end) this proves that there is no such thing
as "eternal torment" and proves that all that God longs for in His goals for mankind will
be met!

Aiwnwn is the same as aionion = aeons/eons

Aiwn is the same as aion = eon/aeon

May God grant us the wisdom and knowledge to understand ALL.

Mis-translations and mis-interpretations

[Hebrew: sheol translated—"pit" and "grave"].

The word "hell" is found in most modern language Bibles. This was not always so.
There are numerous translations, which do not contain the word "hell" even once. Why
is this? Furthermore, new translations are dropping the word hell from their versions.
Do you know why this is happening?

The teaching, that when wicked people die they go to a place of eternal torture in fire is
a pagan/heathen belief and doctrine. This teaching far antedates the Christian era, and
the Old Testament knows nothing of a place of eternal torture in fire upon death. And so
it is impossible to believe that the ancient pagans borrowed the concept of an "eternal
hell of punishment by fire" from the Christian Bible? Is that where the pagans and
heathens learned of this supposed fate of the wicked? Or rather, did some Christian
translators borrow this damnable doctrine from the pagans, and attempt to make it
sound Biblical?

It is astonishing how much of Christian theology is pagan in origin. Job was inspired by
God's Spirit to write, "Shall MORTAL man be more just than God?" Job 4:17.

It is dead people who are raised in the resurrection, not cadavers which once
belonged to living people I Cor. 15:51-54. Did the Old Testament patriarchs believe in
the "immortality of the soul?" No. Did Paul believe in the "immortality of the
soul?" No.

Did the pagan Egyptians believe in the "immortality of the soul?" NO! Have you
ever heard of the pyramids? The pyramids were the supposed launching pads for the
Pharaohs' IMMORTAL souls to be transported into the heavens! First Century Christians
never believed their souls went into the starry firmament of heaven at death—it was the
PAGANS AND HEATHENS that believed in such mythological nonsense. God brought
Israel out of Egypt, but it doesn't look like the paganism of Egypt ever came out of Israel.


How is it possible to teach Christian indoctrinated people the Truths of God? Well, of
course, without the spirit of God it is completely impossible for them to understand.
When people cannot even wrap their minds around the truth that "dead people are
really DEAD," there is little one can do to help them. Dead people do
not "GO" anywhere. Good dead people do not go to heaven to float on clouds and walk
on streets of gold, and bad dead people do not go to a place called hell to be tortured in
fire for all eternity. Dead people are dead and will remain dead until the "Resurrection
from the DEAD," and that resurrection is yet FUTURE.

Just one Scripture from God Himself, and we will move on. When people die, are they
"Now after the DEATH of Moses the servant of the Lord, it came to
pass, that the Lord spoke unto Joshua the son of Nun, Moses' minister,
saying, MOSES MY SERVANT IS DEAD…" Joshua 1:1-2.

When Moses died, God Himself said that Moses was dead. God didn't say that
Moses' "body" died, but that Moses was still alive with the Lord, at His side. NO. The
Lord said, "Moses My servant is DEAD." Physically alive people can be spiritually
dead, but physically dead people cannot be spiritually alive!

When I tell people that when we die, we're DEAD, they call me a heretic (someone
who holds unorthodox religious belief). When I talk to theologians about
the "resurrection of the DEAD," they don't know what I'm talking about.

The "Resurrection of the DEAD" has absolutely no place in Christian theology.

The entire 15th chapter of I Corinthians deals with the resurrection of the dead!

Paul tells us that if there is no resurrection of the dead, then our faith is vain and we
don't have a Saviour. Yet the Church teaches by her heathen doctrines that the
resurrection of the dead is less than USELESS when it comes to living forever in a place
they call heaven. They tell us that all believers go to heaven (ALIVE) at DEATH, and
this "resurrection of the DEAD" stuff that Paul talked about is totally unnecessary
for eternal life in heaven. Well, what can I say—they lie.

And there are hundreds and hundreds of Scriptures which speak of "judgment," yet
the Church teaches that people by the BILLIONS are sent to an eternal hell of fire and
are not even judged before they go there. Another Scriptural doctrine (judgment) bites
the dust of Christian heresy.

Who ever heard of sentencing something to life in prison without even being judged
guilty of anything? But, according to Christendom, it happens thousands of times a day
all over the world, and the sentence isn't for a short number of years, but for all eternity.

Whenever we refuse to BELIEVE THE SCRIPTURES we become hopelessly lost in a

maze of theological confusion that has no end.

Is there a Scripture that states that man is "immortal" or has an "immortal soul" as
the Egyptians taught and believed. No. Does Christendom believe that man has
an "immortal soul?" Yes, absolutely.

Is there a Scripture that states when a man dies, he is DEAD? Yes. Does Christendom
believe that when a man dies, he is DEAD? No, of course not,

Is there a Scripture that states when a man dies, he is still alive? No. Do Christians
believe when we die we are still alive, even though it a different geographical location
(heaven or hell)? Yes, of course.

Are the fundamental doctrines of Christendom based on the Scriptures? I'll not ask any
more foolish questions—read the rest of the letters!

Hell is not only a word found in many Bible Versions; it is also a doctrine based on that
word. The doctrine of hell is an invention of men and is nowhere found in the Hebrew or
Greek manuscripts. As the King James is the most well known of all versions, and
because Christendom as a whole embraces the pagan doctrine of "eternal torture in
a place called hell," it behoves us to deal with this subject in some detail.

Protestant theologians cringe at the accusation that their beloved "inerrant" King
James Bible owes much to Jerome's Catholic Vulgate and to the Latin language as well.

Much of the King James is "Latin" and not "English." It is from the Latin that our Bibles
contain such words as substance, redemption, justification, sanctification,
perdition, perish, punish, torment, damnation, dispensation,
predestination, revelation, priest, minister, congregation, propitiation,
disciple, parable, eternal etc. Although not found in Scripture, the
word TRINITY is also Latin.

That is not to say that these are not perfectly fine words, they are, but we must be aware
that the meaning of words change, and when words change to the very opposite of what
they meant hundreds or thousands of years ago, it behoves us to take note of those
changes as I am doing in this letter. The Latin aeternum and eternalis (from which we
get "eternal") never meant "endlessness" or "without beginning and end" in
the first century AD, Neither did the common use of the word hell back in Old England,
mean a place where living people are tortured in literal everlasting fire.

But make no mistake about it; the King James Bible is "Catholic" in many ways.
Anyone with a copy of the 1611 King James Bible knows that it contains the fourteen
books of the Apocrypha still retained by Catholic Bibles to this day. Protestants who
teach the "inerrancy" and "flawlessness" of the King James have a difficult time
explaining why fourteen whole books have been cut out of this "inerrant" Translation.
Those of us who try to teach the proper use of just two King James errors (hell &
eternal) are met with frightening opposition. Yet they drop FOURTEEN WHOLE
BOOKS from their own Bible without a blush. "Nonsense‖!


First the "HELL" of four centuries ago:

Webster's Twentieth Century Dictionary:

"Hell, n. [ME, helle; AS, hell, hell, from helan, to cover, conceal.]"
Second the "HELL" of the 21st Century:

The American Heritage Collegiate Dictionary:

"The abode of condemned souls and devils... the place of eternal punishment for the
wicked after death, presided over by Satan… a state of separation from God… a place
of evil, misery, discord, or destruction… torment, anguish."

If the English word "helan/helle/hell" had retained its Middle English/Anglo Saxon
meaning, of to "hide," "cover," and "conceal," it might still be an acceptable (even
though it not the best) translation of "sheol/hades." But as this word has long since
taken on the meaning of the pagan teachings concerning the realm of the dead and the
supposed evils contained therein, it is absolutely out of place as a translation of any
Hebrew or Greek word found in the manuscripts.

One more definition—the word "grave:

American Heritage Collage Dictionary:


a. An excavation for the internment of a corpse,

b. A place of burial,

Remember that the Hebrew word sheol and the Greek word hades are both
translated into the two English words "hell" and "grave." Are you following this? The
Hebrew word sheol is translated "hell" 31 times and is also translated "grave" 31
times—the SAME Hebrew word.

But are "hell" and "grave" the SAME word? NO. Do they both have the same
meaning? NO. Then WHY are they both the translation of the ONE Hebrew
word sheol?

There is something sinfully wrong here.

Sheol is translated: "grave—an excavation for the internment of a corpse, a place of burial"


Sheol is translated: "hell--the abode of condemned souls and devils... the place of eternal
punishment for the wicked after death, presided over by Satan… a state of separation from God…
a place of evil, misery, discord, or destruction… torment, anguish."

So how can the word "sheol" (and "Hades" in the New Testament) have for a definition and
for a translation two words that have TOTALLY OPPOSITE AND TOTALLY DIFFERENT
MEANINGS? Well, in honest scholarship and honest translating, THEY CAN'T AND THEY

It is this latter definition of hell that most of Christendom believes to be a doctrinal

teaching of Jesus Christ. The idea that Jesus spoke of a place where people will be
tortured with literal fire, can be totally negated by examining just two verses of Scripture
used by our Lord; We will see whether the Words of Jesus regarding "hell" can
possibly be taken literally or not.

"Can/Should we interpret the Bible as literal?" Can we take the following scripture literal?

"Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast
them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed,
rather than having two hands or two feet TO BE CAST
INTO EVERLASTING FIRE. And if your eye offend thee [cause you to sin],
pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for you to enter into life
with one eye, rather than having two eyes TO BE CAST
INTO HELL FIRE, Matt. 18:8-9…"

And NO, we will NOT enter the Kingdom literally "lame and maimed" with missing
hands, or missing feet, or missing eyes, but rather we will have spiritually amputated the
lust and sin in our HEARTS. Those who do not meet this qualification in this life, will be
brought into the Great White Throne/Lake of Fire Judgment where these sins will be
eradicated, but not with physical, literal, eternal torturing fire, but through
the "CONSUMING FIRE" of God's Spirit and His

Heb. 12:29 & Psalm 104:4

Message Bible ©
Heb. 12:29: He's actively cleaning house, torching all that needs to
burn, and he won't quit until it's all cleansed. God himself is Fire!

Message Bible: Psalm 104:4: You commandeered winds as messengers,

appointed fire and flame as ambassadors.


Let's examine these two verses a little closer:

Matt. 18:7: "Woe unto the world because of offences! For it must needs
be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence

Vs. 8—wherefore if your hand or your foot OFFEND you…"

My King James centre reference says for "offend"—"causes you to sin."

Even this phrase of Jesus is "figurative," and not literal. How, pray tell, can a member
of your body such as an eye, hand, or foot, "cause" one to sin? Seriously, can
your "foot" cause your heart and mind to sin? This is nonsense if we take it literally. An
appendage of our body absolutely cannot cause us to offend. Jesus Christ tells us
plainly where offences come from:

"...For out of THE HEART [not the eye or the hand or the foot] proceeds evil
thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness,
(Matt. 15:18-19). Matt. 12:34.

This is figurative language so simple that a ten-year-old can understand it, but
theologians with six doctorates cannot (or will not).

 We cannot blame our foot for KICKING SOMEONE.

 We cannot blame our hands for STRANGLING SOMEONE.
 We cannot blame or eyes for LUSTING AFTER ANOTHER MAN'S WIFE.
 We cannot blame our tongues for DESIRING JUNK FOODS.
 We cannot blame our knees for BOWING DOWN TO IDOLS.
 We cannot blame our mouth for SPEAKING BLASPHEMY AND CURSES.
 We cannot blame our ears for listening to RAP—sorry, I hate rap.
 We cannot blame our nose for STICKING IT INTO ANOTHER'S BUSINESS.
 We cannot blame our fingers for BEING STICKY AND STEALING.

Are you getting the picture? It is the HEART that is the seat of emotion and
desire that is to be blamed.

And so literally, an eye or a hand or a foot, does not and cannot "offend God" unless
it is first motivated to do something evil by the heart. Therefore it is the heart that
offends, but the physical appendages of our body do not have the ability to offend.
Hands and feet do not have a consciousness of their own.

So what does all this prove? It proves the words of Jesus regarding the so called "hell
fire" are not to be taken literally.


"Wherefore if your hand or your foot offend you, CUT THEM OFF…"
Matt. 18:8

Someone tried to contradict what I teach on this verse by suggesting that if we would
repent of our offenses, then we don't need to cut off our hands and feet. My point
exactly. But if taken literally, repentance is not an option.
Repentance is only an option if these words are NOT taken literally.

Absolutely nothing regarding this first statement of Jesus is literally even possible:
Your literal eyes, hands and feet cannot "cause offence." Christians who claim that
these words are literal do not literally obey them.


"From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, 'Repent for the
Kingdom of Heaven is at hand'"
Matt. 4:17.

Did anyone know what Jesus was talking about? No. Did anyone know
what "repent" really meant? No. Did anyone have even a clue as to what Jesus meant
by "The Kingdom of Heaven?" No. The "Kingdom of Heaven" was the gospel
that Jesus preached. But did anyone really know what it was? How many even today
know what "the gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven" really is? Do you know?
Could you teach a class on exactly what the Kingdom of Heaven really is? Ask your
Pastors and Apostles to tell you.

One will never know what Jesus preached until they understand how
Jesus preached.

When will we begin believing what Jesus taught us concerning the words He used to
teach? If you will pay heed to what Jesus taught, you will learn more in five minutes than
you would otherwise in 50 years.

After reading parable after parable, beginning in Matt. 13, we read this:

"And great multitudes were gathered together unto Him… and He

spoke many things unto them IN PARABLES…" (Vs. 2-3).

"Another parable put He forth unto them…" (Vs. 24).

"Another parable put He forth unto them…" (Vs. 31).

"Another parable spoke He unto them…" (Vs. 33).

"ALL these things spoke Jesus unto the multitude in PARABLES; and
without a parable spoke He not unto them" (Matt. 13: 34).

"And with many such parables spoke He the word unto them, as they
were able to hear it. But without a parable spoke He not unto them:
and when they were alone, He expounded ['explained' John 10:6] all
things to His disciples" Mark 4:33-34.

"These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs [Gk: 'figurative

language']: but the time comes, when I shall no more speak unto you in
proverbs, but I shall show you plainly of the Father" John 16:25.
Remember that John 16 is recording the last words of our Lord before the crucifixion
the following day. So up until that very last night with His disciples He had spoken His
own public ministry in proverbs and parables—figurative language symbols and signs.
And we have a further verification of these statements when Jesus said: "…the
WORDS that I speak unto you, they are SPIRIT…"
John 6:63.


Jesus said that it would be:

"…better for you to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having
two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting [eonian] fire".
Matt. 18:8.

We have seen that our Lord's instructions to cut off an offending hand or foot, or to pluck
out an offending eye is not literal, but figurative, spiritual, symbolic language. It is really
the offenses of the heart, which are to be cast off, not our physical limbs. Well then, can
it be true that any actually will enter into life "halt or maimed" if the halting and
maiming itself is not literal, Of course not. Imagine living an eternity with God maimed
and crippled like some wartime amputee? What kind of a heaven would that be? It is
hard to believe that Christians (and even professional theologians), pay little or no
attention to the many words that contradict their heretical doctrines. But in their crazed
addiction for their "literal," interpretation, they become scholastic fools.

Okay then, as the "cutting off of hands and feet" is not literal, and the
"entering into life halt and maimed" is not literal, by what law of logic or
language should the "everlasting fire" be considered literal?

There is nothing in the context of these two verses that would suggest in any way that
part of the verses are figurative, symbolic language, and part are literal. However, that
does not mean that what Jesus said is not true. Of course what He said is true, but it is
not literally true; it is figuratively, symbolic, and spiritually true.


I think most of my readers realize that Jesus did not speak Archaic King James English.
And most also realize that the King James Bible is not the one that the Apostles used.
There were no "bibles" during Christ's ministry; there were only the Hebrew
Scriptures, and a popular Greek translation of those Hebrew Scriptures called
the Septuagint. What we call the New Testament was not even written until near the
end of the first century, and was not put into book form until much later, and was not
printed until many centuries later.

The word "hell" is an Old English word that was used to translate several words found
in the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. What words? And why did they choose to use the
Old English word "hell" as a translation? We shall see that it had absolutely nothing to
do with scholarship, but everything to do with forcing pagan religion into the teachings of
Jesus Christ. You don't have to take my word for it; you will be able to judge for yourself
as we go through it.
Here are the words for which "hell" was inserted as a "translation" into English:

The Hebrew word sheol (31 times)

The Greek word gehenna (12 times)
The Greek word hades (10 times)
The Greek word tartarus (1 time)

That's it.

Every time the word "hell" is found in the King James Bible it is translated from one of
these four words. We find the word "hell" 31 times in the KJV Old Testament and
23 times in the KJV New Testament for a total of 54 times. Later we will look at all
54 verses containing the word "hell," plus the 31 times that sheol is translated
as "grave."


If the word "hell" is the most accurate and correct English word available to translate,
the Hebrew word sheol, and the Greek words gehenna,
hades, and tartartus, then these four words must all have the same meaning. But in
reality only two of these four words have the same meaning.

The Hebrew word sheol and the Greek word hades are synonymous in meaning. And
here is the proof from the Scriptures and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that the
Hebrew sheol and the Greek hades are identical in meaning:

Acts 2:27: "Because You will not leave My soul in hell [Gk: hades],
neither will You suffer your Holy One to see corruption"

Is quoted from

Psalm 16:10: "For You will not leave My soul in hell [Heb: sheol]; neither
will You suffer your Holy One to see corruption."

And so the inspiration of the Spirit of God proves that the Greek word
hades is the right and proper translation of the Hebrew word Sheol,
Whatever "hades" means, "sheol" means the same, and
whatever "sheol" means, "hades" also means the same.

We know for a fact that the Hebrew word Sheol is translated "hell" 31 times in the KJV
of the Bible. But… BUT, we also know for a fact that the same Hebrew word Sheol is
translated "grave" 31 times in the KJV Bible. As we go through the 31 Scriptures in
which the KJV uses the word "grave," it will become abundantly clear that "grave" is
the proper translation. But when we come to the 31 times that KJV uses the
word "hell" to translate this same Hebrew word, it will also become abundantly clear
that word, "GRAVE" should have been used in all of those 31 verses as well. Yes, the
"context" will show that "grave" or its literal meaning of "the UNSEEN" can be
consistently used in all 62 verses without jeopardizing or violating the context.

While it is true that a number of verses use sheol—the unseen, the grave, in a
poetic or figurative sense, absolutely nowhere is sheol used to represent a place of life,
consciousness, fire, or torture—nowhere, absolutely nowhere.


In the Old Testament of the KJV Bible we find the word "hell" 31 times. All 31 times it
is translated from the very same one, Hebrew word, sheol.

Therefore, it would seem logical to assume that "sheol" means "hell." That "hell" is
in fact, the right and proper English translation for the Hebrew word sheol. Wrong. Not
true. Not even close.

Why is that? Because although "hell" is always the translation of the word sheol,
sheol is not always translated "hell." No sir. In fact, sheol is also translated 31 times
as "grave." And just for good measure, the Hebrew sheol is translated 3 times into
English as "pit." Is there any rhyme or reason for this nonsense? No, none.

Try to keep the following straight in your mind as we go through all of these Scriptures.
Remember that every time we come across the word
sheol (no matter how it is translated in the particular verse we are examining), it is the
same word and never changes from that same word, whether the translators render
it "pit," "grave," or "hell."

If the word sheol can be properly and accurately translated by the English word "hell,"
then there must be present in each and every verse some form or semblance
of the definition of the word "hell." Am I overstepping the bounds of sane scholarship?
Is this too logical and rational to be good theology? Have I violated any Scriptural
principle? Then let's proceed.

Here is every verse of Scripture in which we find the Hebrew word sheol, translated in
the KJV as either "pit," "grave," or "hell." Judge for yourself what this word means.


The word "pit" is found 77 times in the Old Testament, but only 3 times is it translated
from the Hebrew word sheol:
1."If these men DIED the common DEATH of all men, or if they be
visited after the visitation of all men; then the Lord has not sent me.
But if the Lord make a new thing, and the earth open her mouth, and
swallow them up, with all that appertain unto them, and they go down
quick into the PIT [Heb: sheol]; then ye shall understand that these men
have provoked the Lord."Numbers 16:29-30.

2."And it came to pass, as he had made an end of speaking all these

words, that the GROUND clave asunder that was under them: and the
earth opened her mouth, and swallowed them up, and their houses, and
all the men that appertained unto Korah, and all their goods. They, and
all that appertained to them, went down alive into the PIT [Heb: sheol],
and the EARTH closed upon them: and they PERISHED from among the
congregation" Numbers 16:31-33.

Now then, what can we learn from this word "sheol" in these verses? We learn
that sheol is in "the GROUND… under them." Korah and his men all "died" an
uncommon "death" in this sheol--pit. And it says that "they PERISHED." While
the ground was "opened up," it was a PIT. After the ground closes up the pit, it was a
GRAVE. This whole episode was a supernatural "mass burial in a mass grave," and
nothing more. All these men are "dead and perished." Are we learning? What does
the word "perished" signify? Are they lost for all eternity, because God caused them
to "perish?" No, not at all, Even righteous people "perish."

"The righteous perish and no man lays it to heart…" Isa. 57:1.

Also consider, if sheol is a hell of torture in fire, did you notice that God consigned the
"houses" of Korah and his men to this same fate. Do we reckon that the "houses" of
Korah and his men will also be "tortured in the fire of hell forever?" Good, so
we are making progress—two down and 61 to go.

3. "If I wait, the GRAVE [Heb: sheol] is mine HOUSE: I have made my BED
in the DARKNESS. I have said to CORRUPTION, You are my father; to
the worm, You are my mother, and my sister. And where is now my
hope? As for my hope, who shall see it? They shall go down to the bars
of the PIT [Heb: sheol], when our REST together is in the DUST"
Job 17:13-16.

Wow. See anything wrong with this picture of "sheol" being an "eternal hell of
torture in fire?" What I see here is: "grave, house, bed, darkness,
corruption, worm, pit, rest, and dust." There are all kinds of problems with
these verses if we desire to pervert them into an "eternal hell of fire."
A "grave" is in the ground. A "house" is an abode, not a place designed for torture in
fire. A "bed" is where one sleeps, and God likens death in the
grave [sheol] to "sleep"

"…lest I sleep the sleep of death" Psalm 13:3.

"Darkness" is something that is found in a grave beneath the earth, not something
you would find where there is a huge fire present. "Corruption" is what happens when
a corpse decays in a relatively short period of time, not something that is never
accomplished in even an eternity of burning in the fabled Christian hell. "Worms" live in
the ground in dead bodies, and in garbage where they continue to live and multiply as
long as there is food present, but they don't do very well in literal fire.

A "pit" is "a hole in the ground" according to Webster's Dictionary. We would

hardly be at "rest" if we were being eternally tortured by literal fire. And "dust" is what
bodies return to when they are dead. God formed man from the "dust of the
ground," not from "eternal hell fire." Besides all this proof, does anyone think that
God would eternally torture Job (apparently the most righteous man on the face of the
earth in his day) in literal fire when he died? How pray tell! This completes the 3 times
that sheol are translated "pit."


1. "And all his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort him; but he
refused to be comforted; and he said, For I will go down into the grave
[Heb: sheol] unto my son mourning. Thus his father wept for him"
Gen. 37:35.

Here "grave" (sheol) is used figuratively. Jacob did not literally go into the grave of
his son Joseph, seeing that Joseph was not even "literally" dead at this time.

2. "And he [Jacob] said, My son [Benjamin] shall not go down with you; for
his brother [Joseph] is dead [Jacob thought Joseph was dead], and he is left
alone: If mischief befall him by the way in the which you go, then shall
you bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave
[Heb: sheol]" Gen. 42:38.

Gray hairs can only figuratively "sorrow." And "hair" does not do well in fire.

3. "And if you take this also from me, and mischief befall him, you shall
bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave" Gen. 44:29.

Once again, Jacob uses the word "grave" (Sheol) figuratively, and there is no
mention of fire.
4."…and thy servants shall bring down the gray hairs of thy servant our
father with sorrow to the grave [Heb:Sheol]" Gen. 44:31.

5. "The Lord kills, and makes alive: He brings down to the grave
[Heb: Sheol], and brings up" I Sam. 2:6.

And so, just as surely as God "brings down to the grave," He likewise, "brings
up [from the grave]." Therefore, the "grave" [Sheol] is not an eternal place. Plus, no
mention of "fire" in this place called Sheol.

6. "Do therefore according to your wisdom, and let not his hoar head go
down to the grave [Heb: Sheol] in PEACE" I Kings 2:6.

Obviously, this verse tells us that the "grave (sheol)" is a place of "peace," and that
is why David didn't want his enemy's death to be a peaceful one.

7. "Now therefore hold him not guiltless: for you are a wise man, and
know what you ought to do to him; but his hoar head bring you down to
the grave [Heb: Sheol] with BLOOD" I Kings 2:9.

King David is called a "bloody man" in the Scriptures. David liked blood and violence.
His dying words are for His son Solomon to be a "hit man" for him, and to violently
destroy David's long-time enemies (for which David will have to bitterly repent in the
Great White Throne Judgment). David wanted Solomon to make their deaths painful
and "bloody," as even David himself knew that his enemies would merely
"sleep the sleep of death" once they were killed. But again, no "fire" in
this "grave"—only "peace," even for David's worst enemies.

8. "As a cloud is consumed and vanishes away; so he that goes down to

the grave [Heb: Sheol] shall come up no more" Job 7:9.

Job was inspired to write that a person "vanishes away" in Sheol. No fire there.

9. "O that you would hide me in the grave [Heb: Sheol] …If a man die,
shall he live again? All the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my
change come" Job 14:13-14.

Job knew that he would not stay in Sheol forever. No fire there.

10. "If I wait, the grave [Heb: Sheol] is mine house: I have made my bed
in the darkness" Job 17:13.

Same words Job used previously.

11. "They spend their days in wealth, and in a moment go down to
the grave [Heb: Sheol]" Job 21:13.

Job goes on to say in verses 23-26 that those blessed and those cursed, "They shall
lie down alike in the dust, and the worms shall cover them."

12. "Drought and heat consume the snow waters: so does the grave
[Heb: Sheol] those which have sinned" Job 24:19.

"ALL have sinned and so all "consume" away in the grave until they return to the
dust from where they came.

13. "For in death there is NO REMEMBRANCE of Thee: in the grave

[Heb: Sheol] who shall give you thanks?" Psalm 6:5.

King David knew and was inspired to write that if he were to die, he knew that there
would be no remembrance of God in the grave. No fire here either.

14. "O Lord, You have brought up my soul from the grave
[Heb: Sheol]: You have kept me alive, that I should not go down to the
pit [this time pit is not translated from Sheol]" Psalm 30:3.

Here King David is likewise speaking figuratively, as he was not literally killed or put into
a grave.

15. "Let me not be ashamed, O Lord; for I have called upon you: let the
wicked be ashamed, and let them be silent in the grave
[Heb: Sheol]" Psalm 31:17.

Well, so much for all the supposed cries of anguish in Sheol. David knew
that Sheol was a place of complete "silence."

16 & 17 "Like sheep they are laid in the grave [Heb: Sheol]; death shall
feed on them; and the upright shall have dominion over them in the
morning; and their beauty shall consume in the grave [Heb: Sheol] from
their dwelling" Psalm 49:14.
There is "death" in the grave (Sheol). There is not living torture in fire.

18. "But God will REDEEM MY SOUL from the power of the grave
[Heb: Sheol]: for he shall receive me. Selah" Psalm 49:15.

Well there you have it! Souls can be "redeemed from the power of sheol"! No
eternal torture in fire where souls can and will be "REDEEMED"!
It should be self-explanatory as to why the translators didn't translate this
particular "sheol" into the English word "hell." They sure didn't want anyone to know
that souls will be "redeemed from hell."
19. "For my soul is full of troubles: and my life draws nigh unto
the grave [Heb: Sheol]" Psalm 88:3.

King David knew that when he died he was going to be placed in Sheol.

20. "What man is he that lives, and shall not see death? Shall he deliver
his soul from the hand of the grave [Heb:Sheol]. Selah" Psalm 89:48.

And so according to this verse of Scripture, there is not a man who ever lives (that's all
humanity) that shall not go to Sheol when he dies. Everyone goes to the grave;
everyone goes to
Sheol. But it is silent there. No remembrance. No pain, suffering, or fire.

21. "Let us swallow them up alive as the grave; and whole, as those
that go down into the pit" Prov. 1:12.

This too is speaking of the grave in figurative language.

22. "…There are three things that are never satisfied, yea, four things
say, not, it is enough. The grave [Heb: Sheol]; and the barren womb; the
earth that is not filled with water; and the fire that says not, it is
enough" Prov. 30:15-16.

The earth is our "grave," and it can hold billions of bodies.

23. "Whatsoever your hand finds to do, do it with your might; for there is
no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave
[Heb: Sheol], where you go" Ecclesiastes 9:10.

The word "device" means "contrivance, intelligence and reason." And there
are none of these in Sheol. Neither is there any work, knowledge, or wisdom there.
Since there are not any of these faculties of consciousness there, how can "sheol" be
translated "hell" which is supposed to be a place of eternal torture in fire? Does it
sound nonsense to you now?

24. "Set me as a seal upon your heart, as a seal upon your arm: for love
is strong as death; jealousy is cruel as the grave [Heb: Sheol]: the coats
thereof are coats of fire, which have a most vehement flame. Many
waters cannot quench LOVE, neither can the floods drown it…" Song of
Solomon 8:6-7.

I included verse 7 here so that no one would be confused and think that the "flames of
fire" are in "sheol," but are rather the "coats of fire and flame" of jealousy.
25. "Thy pomp is brought down to the grave [Heb: Sheol], and the noise of
your viols [harps]: the worm is spread under you, and the worms cover
you" Isa. 14:11.

This is figurative language once more. Seeing that "pomp," a character flaw,
and "harps," musical instruments do not literally go anywhere, but they do cease to
exist from the perspective of the person possessing them.

26. "I said in the cutting off of my days, I shall go to the gates of
the grave [Heb: Sheol]: I am deprived of the residue of my years"
(Isa. 38:10).

If one were to continue living in a place called hell, he could hardly declare that his days
and years would end. If hell is eternal, then he would continue to live forever.

27. "For the grave [Heb: Sheol] cannot praise Thee, death cannot
celebrate Thee: they that go down in to the pit cannot hope for Thy
truth" Isa. 38:18.

Of course "sheol cannot praise Thee," seeing that there is no intelligence or

reason in Sheol, as we just learned a few Scriptures above.

28. "Thus said the Lord God, In the day when he [Pharaoh] went down to
the grave [Heb: Sheol] I caused a mourning: I covered the deep for him,
and I restrained the floods thereof, and the great waters were stayed:
and I caused Lebanon to mourn for him, and all the trees of the field
fainted for him" Ezek. 31:15.

Ezek. 31:16-17 again contain the word "sheol", but there it is

translated "hell" which we will cover when we cover all the verses with "hell" in them.
But there is no eternal torture by fire in this verse.

29 & 30. "I will RANSOM them from the power of the grave [Heb: Sheol]; I
will REDEEM them from death: O DEATH, I will be your plagues;
O grave [Heb: Sheol], I will be your destruction: repentance shall be hid
from mine eyes" Hosea 13:14.

This verse all by itself destroys the whole eternal torture in fire theory.
If Sheol is "hell," then this verse plainly tells us that
[1] God will "ransom" those who are in Sheol.

[2] God will be the plague of DEATH.

[3] God tells us that Sheol itself is to be "DESTROYED." And isn't this exactly what
we are told in:
Revelation 20:14 — "And DEATH and hell [Gk: hades / Heb: Sheol] were
cast into the lake of fire. This is the second DEATH."

31. "Our BONES are scattered at the grave's [Heb: Sheol] mouth, as when
one cuts and cleaves wood upon the earth. Psalm 141:7.

Once more King David is speaking figuratively in a poetic style. The grave does not
literally have a "mouth." That concludes the 31 places Sheol is
translated "grave." Not one of these 34 verses cited uses Sheol to mean a place or
condition of conscious torture in literal fire for all eternity. Why then would we suppose
that the next 31 verses that use this exact same word, Sheol would change the
meaning to a place of conscious torture of wicked people in literal fire for all eternity?
How can such a travesty (distortion) of scholarship ever be accepted by those who still
possess a functioning mind?


The Hebrew word laban means "white"—like milk, like teeth—WHITE. First, imagine
we would translate this word laban in 31 verses of Scripture into the English
word "white." So far; so good. But next, imagine we translate this word laban in 31
different verses of Scripture into the English word "BLACK." Does anyone see a
problem with such scholarship? It's crazy, and yet this IS what has happened in the
KJV with regards to the Hebrew word Sheol—31 times "grave," and 31
times "hell." And what does UNCONSCIOUS DEATH IN THE GRAVE have in
FIRE? Nothing—absolutely NOTHING! It's as different as "black" and "white."

I do not even contend that this is bad scholarship. This is NO scholarship at all. This is
nothing less than FRAUD—a Christian HOAX! Show me where else in historic
academia we find such reckless abandonment of the facts? I am not contending for my
personal preference in translating the scriptures, but to merely translate accurately and
consistently what we find in ALL THE HEBREW AND GREEK MANUSCRIPTS.

ONCE MORE: In the Hebrew manuscripts, we find the word Sheol 65 times; therefore,
in our English translations we should find ONE WORD for all 65 times Sheol appears.
But, no, we find ONE Hebrew word translated into THREE DIFFERENT ENGLISH
WORDS—"pit, grave, and hell." And in the New Testament we have the opposite
of this Hebrew fraud: We have the ONE English word "hell" translated from THREE
DIFFERENT GREEK WORDS—"gehenna, hades, and Tartarus."

Then we come to the greatest New Testament fraud of all regarding "hell." One time
and one time only we find the Greek word hades, translated not "hell," but "grave."
Why? Why just one time, "grave?" Why? Because the translators did not want
us "dumb sheep" to ever know what hades really means.

If "grave" and "hell" had very similar meanings, then their use would not be so
damning, but as they are opposites in every way there is no justifiable reason for their
use. And if the Greek words "hades" and "gehenna" were very similar in meaning it
might be justifiable to translate them into the same one English word, but they are not;
they are totally different separate words with complete different meanings.

At least half of the translations in the Old Testament are correct, in that Sheol can be
translated correctly as "grave." But in the New Testament, not even once is the
English word "hell" a justifiable translation for any Greek word found in the


We have now seen 34 verses of Scripture in which we find the ancient Hebrew
word Sheol, and how it is used in context. We have seen "Sheol" used in poetic
figurative language as a place, condition, or realm of "sorrow and mourning," as for
a dead or presumed dead child. Only figuratively does someone still living go down
to "Sheol." It is decidedly the realm of the dead, and therefore is figuratively used
sometimes to represent something very ghastly or frightening (as we will later see was
the case with Jonah).

When God kills someone, it is said that God brings them down to "Sheol." When
someone goes down to "Sheol," he is not able to come back up. In Job we learned
that when we die we are hid in "Sheol" until an appointed time when we will
be changed from whatever our condition in "Sheol" is. Also, Job likens "Sheol" to
a bed in a dark place (not unlike sleeping in our bedroom with the lights off). And Job
also informs us that the blessed and cursed both go to "Sheol."

We consume away in this place called "Sheol." In "Sheol" there is

no remembrance or communication with the world of the living.
The hand of "Sheol" is called death, and everyone who lives will be drawn to
it. Ecclesiastes 9:10 is probably the most telling Scripture of all with regards to what
we do NOT find in "Sheol." No work, device [intelligence/reason], knowledge or
wisdom. Not even the righteous can celebrate or praise God in "sheol." Hosea
informed us that God will be death's PLAGUE. In other words, God will be a
plague to "sheol" itself, not the dead people who reside in Sheol. In fact God says
He will RANSOM AND REDEEM those in "Sheol." Oh yes, God will ransom and
redeem them ALL who go down to Sheol, but not all at the same time. Remember
there are TWO resurrections—One to life with Christ in His Kingdom,
and Another to the great white throne/lake of fire/second death,

Although everyone has a perception OF death, and many actually experience the
process OF dying, absolutely no one will ever experience anything IN the death state
itself. There is no experience or perception in death. And although no one desires to go
to sheol [the grave]; that is no one desires to DIE, but nonetheless, it is a safe place to
be while we await resurrection. Nothing can harm us there. There is no fear or darkness
there, because there is NO PERCEPTION THERE. Sheol is truly like a deep, sound
SLEEP, from which our Father will awaken us in the morning. Let us be comforted by
that thought.

We have seen already how the Hebrew word sheol in the Old Testament is
translated "pit" three times and "grave" thirty one times. In this part we will see that
this very same Hebrew word Sheol is also translated thirty one times as "hell." Just
what, pray tell, is the linguistic law or principle that imposed the translators to do this? No
law. No principle. Well, why then?

There is NO Scriptural or rational reason for translating the Hebrew word Sheol into the
English word "hell" at all—NONE! And there surely is no reason to use the word hell in
light of the fact that the Old English meaning of this word has been grossly perverted by
the Christian church beyond recognition over the past four centuries. Let's look at our
definitions once more:

The "HELL" as the English used it in everyday life in the 1600's:

Webster's Twentieth Century Dictionary: "hell, n. [ME, helle; AS, hell, hell, from
helan, to cover, conceal.]"

The "HELL" of the 21st Century:

The American Heritage Collegiate Dictionary: "The abode of condemned souls and
devils...the place of eternal punishment for the wicked after death, presided over by
Satan…a state of separation from God…a place of evil, misery, discord, or destruction
…torment, anguish."

Does anyone believe that these two definitions of "hell" have anything whatsoever in
common with each other? Then how is it even in the realm of possibility that the
Christian definition of hell today can be a translation for a word that is also to this day,
translated three times as "pit," and thirty-one times as "grave."


Words fail to express the depth of this Satanic heresy. Theologians, professors,
teachers, preachers, and pastors decry (criticize) the sins of the most vile (disgusting)
sinners of humanity, and then teach that the God Who will be their Judge, is trillions of
times more depraved than the ones being judged. And this they
call "FAIR" and "JUSTICE." UNBELIEVABLE! May God have mercy upon their
depraved minds and miserable souls! Amen.

Preach with SOUND DOCTRINE and Refute those who CONTRADICT IT"
(Titus 1:9, The New Revised Standard Version).

First we will go through all 31 references to "hell" in the Old Testament of the King
James Bible. All 31 "hells" are translated from the one Hebrew word Sheol.

We will then see if there is a lick of difference between those verses where Sheol is
translated grave and where it is translated hell. I hope that you will be as shocked and
outraged as I was when I discovered these truths.

To save time, I will not comment on every single reference to "hell" translated
from "Sheol," but I will quote them all and point out the fallacies on those that make
mention to fire or anything vaguely related to the Christian hell.

In all the "Torah"—the Law, that is all the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus,
Numbers and Deuteronomy, the word "hell" appears but once in the King James Bible.
Here it is:

1. "For a fire is kindled in mine anger and shall burn unto the
lowest hell [Heb: Sheol], and shall consume the earth with her increase,
and set on fire the foundations of the mountains" Deut. 32:22.

Well, at last. There it is, "fire" is found with the word Sheol, so surely now we have
found Scriptural proof that Sheol sometimes does mean the Christian "hell of
eternal torture in fire," right? WRONG! This verse says nothing of burning dead
people in Sheol with fire.

The whole chapter is a "Song of Moses" (See Vs. 1). God prophesies through
Moses' Song, His anger over Israel's lack of faith and the fact that they will turn to other
gods, and for this God will punish them. He will not, however, torture them in an eternal
fire of a Christian hell. Here is what God will do to them:

"For the Lord shall judge His people… I KILL, and I make ALIVE: I
wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of My
hand" Deut. 32:36a & 39.

Notice that according to God Himself, the only way that someone He "kills" can ever
live again is if God also "makes alive" again. Do Christians believe that dead people
must be made alive again? No, of course not, they don't believe that dead people are
even dead, so why would God ever have to "make alive" again? It is not
Scientifically, Physiologically, or scripturally possible to physically DIE and yet be alive.

Let's notice one most profound point in this Song of Moses which should remove any
and all doubt as to whether Israel is being "tortured in literal fire" in this "lowest
Vs. 25:"The sword without, and the terror within, shall destroy both the
young man and the virgin, THE SUCKLING [an infant; a BABY] also with the
man of gray hairs."

To be sure, God affirms that suckling's will be in this Sheol. Are we to believe that
God will TORTURE sucklings in Sheol? Is Sheol really a hell of torture in fire as
orthodoxy demands? No, this is nothing more than the "GRAVE" that we saw in the
previous 31 Scriptures translated from the same Hebrew word Sheol.

2. The sorrows of hell [Heb: Sheol] compassed [surrounded] me about: the

snares of death prevented [confronted] me" II Sam. 22:6.

Does anyone believe that David just narrowly escaped the tortures of an eternal hell of
pain in literal fire? No? I don't either. But I can clearly see how he felt death and the
grave closing in on him when his enemies were out to kill him.

3. It [the wisdom and secrets of God] is as high as heaven; what can you do?
Deeper than hell [Heb: Sheol]; what can you know" Job 11:8.

This is poetic language and has nothing to do with a place of torture in fire.

4. Hell [Heb: Sheol] is naked before him, and destruction has no

covering" Job 26:6.

5. The wicked shall be turned [Heb: shub] into hell [Heb: Sheol], and all
the nations that forget God" Psalm 9:17.

You see, the word translated "turned" is the Hebrew word shub and it means "to
RETURN," (not "turn" or "turned"), but REturn or REturned. In fact this word is
translated "return" or "returned" almost 100% of the approximately 450 times it is
used. Notice how other versions correct this same verse:

"The lawless shall RETURN [Heb: shub] to hades, All nations forgetful of
God" (Psalm 9:17, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible).

"The nations shall be TURNED BACK unto sheol, All nations that are
forgetful of God" (Psalm 9:17, The New American Bible).

"The wicked do TURN BACK to sheol, All nations forgetting

God" (Psalm 9:17, Young's Literal Translation).

"The wicked shall RETURN [Heb: shub] to the unseen, all nations
forgetful of God" (Psalm 9:17 Concordant Literal Old Testament).

Actually "return" is a better translation than "turn back," but at least we can see that
other translators see and use the proper meaning of shub, which of course, The King
James did not.

The Bible likens death to a "Return." The soul RETURNS to sheol/hades—the

UNSEEN. The spirit RETURNS to God who gave it. And the body RETURNS to the
dust of the ground from whence it came. And so likewise, the wicked nations will
be RETURNED to Sheol—the grave, Sheol, the unseen, DEATH...

If "Sheol" is a Christian hell of torture in fire, then they would also have to
conclude that these nations also CAME FROM an eternity of suffering in fire, and
they are not RETURNING to that same place. Anyone see a problem with such
unscriptural nonsense?

6. "For you will not leave my soul in hell [Heb: Sheol]; neither will you
suffer Your Holy One to see corruption" Psalm 16:10.

Although this is a prophecy concerning the Lord, it is nonetheless, the words of David
concerning himself and his own salvation from Sheol. Notice that David concedes that
he (his soul, the conscious, sentient self) will die and go to Sheol. But David's prayer is
that God, "will not LEAVE my soul in sheol."
Everyone's soul goes to Sheol at death—both the sinners and the saints.

7. "The sorrows of hell [Heb: Sheol] compassed me about: the snares of

death prevented [confronted] me" Psalm 18:5.

David is not in Sheol, but rather is sorrowful in just contemplating death.

8. "Let DEATH seize upon them, and let them go down quick into hell
[Heb: Sheol]: for wickedness is in their dwellings, and among
them" Psalm 55:15.

Notice that one must be "dead" in order to go to Sheol.

9. "For great is Thy mercy toward me: and you have delivered my soul
from the lowest [depth of] hell [Heb: Sheol]" Psalm 86:13.

10. "The sorrows of death compassed me, and the pains of hell
[Heb: Sheol] got hold upon me: I found trouble and sorrow" Ps. 116:3.

11. "If I ascend up into heaven, You are there: if I make my bed in hell
[Heb: Sheol], behold, You are there" Psalm 139:8.

12. "Her feet go down to death; her steps take hold on hell
[Heb: Sheol]" Prov. 5:5.

Seems pretty clear that feet and steps are one, and they go to one place—death
and hell [Sheol] are all one
.13. "Her house is the way to hell [Heb: Sheol], going down to the
chambers of death" Prov. 7:27.

Once more, her house with its chambers, go down to hell/sheol and death.

14. "But he knows not that the DEAD are there; and that her guests are
in the depths of hell [Heb: Sheol]" Prov. 9:18.

Hell/sheol contains DEAD PEOPLE, not living souls!

15. "Hell [Heb: Sheol] and destruction are before the Lord: how much
more then the hearts of the children of men?" Prov. 15:11.

16. "The way of life is above to the wise, that he may depart [keep
away] from hell [Heb: Sheol] beneath" Prov. 15:24.

17. "You shall beat him with the rod, and shall deliver his soul from hell
[Heb: Sheol]" Prov. 23:14.

18. Hell [Heb: Sheol] and destruction are never full; so the eyes of man
are never satisfied" Prov. 27:20.

19. "Therefore hell [Heb: Sheol] has enlarged herself, and opened her
mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their
pomp, and he that rejoices, shall descend into it" Isa. 5:14.

20. Hell [Heb: Sheol] from beneath is moved for you to meet you at the
coming; it stirs up the dead for you, even all the chief ones of the
earth; it has raised up from their thrones all the kings of the
nations" Isa. 14:9.

21. "Yet you shall be brought down to hell [Heb: Sheol] to the sides of
the pit" Isa. 14:15.

22. "Because you have said, We have made a covenant with DEATH,
and with hell [Heb: sheol] are we at agreement; when the overflowing
scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have
made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves"
Isa. 28:15.

23. "And your covenant with DEATH shall be disannulled, and your
agreement with hell [Heb: Sheol] shall not stand; when the overflowing
scourge shall pass through, then you shall be trodden down by it"
Isa. 28:18.
Notice in both verses 15 and 18 of Isa. 28 that "death and hell"
keep company together. Another major proof that those in Sheol are DEAD, not
tortured in fire. Sheol is associated with DEATH, not life.

24. "And you went to the king with ointment, and did increase your
perfumes, and did send your messengers far off, and did debase
yourself even unto hell [Heb: Sheol]" Isa. 57:9.

25. "I made the nations to shake at the sound of his fall; when I cast
him down to hell [Heb: Sheol] with them that descend into the pit and all
the trees of Eden, the choice and best of Lebanon, all that drink water,
shall be comforted in the nether parts of the earth" Ezek. 31:16.

26. "They also went down into hell [Heb: Sheol] with him unto them that
be slain with the sword: and they that were his arm, that dwelt under
his shadow in the midst of the heathen" Ezek. 31:17.

27. "The strong among the mighty shall speak to him out of the midst
of hell [Heb: Sheol] with them that help him: they are gone down, they
lie uncircumcised, slain by the sword" Ezek. 32:21.

28. "And they shall not lie with the mighty that are fallen of the
uncircumcised, which are gone down to hell [Heb: sheol] with their
weapons of war: and they have laid their swords under their heads, but
their iniquities shall be upon their bones, through they were the terror
of the mighty in the land of the living" Ezek. 32:27.

29. "Though they dig into hell [Heb: sheol], thence shall mine hand take
them; though they climb up to heaven, thence will I bring them down"
Amos 9:2.

30. "And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the Lord, and He
heard me; out of the BELLY of hell [Heb:Sheol] cried I, and You heard my
voice" Jonah 2:2.

Imagine that! The belly of a FISH is also the "belly of hell."

But for sure there was no literal fire inside that fish torturing Jonah.

31. "Yea also, because he transgresses by wine, he is a proud man,

neither keeps at home, who enlarges his desire as hell [Heb: sheol] , and
is as DEATH, and cannot be satisfied, but gathers unto him all nations,
and heaps unto him all people"
Hab. 2:5.
Again we see death and hell keeping company. There is NO CONSCIOUSNESS in
Sheol / hades / grave / death. Jonah only figuratively (symbolically) cried
out from "the belly of hell/sheol."
Jonah was not literally in Sheol, as he had not died, although he was very close to it.
David in the same way, cried out in his agony as though he had already been consumed
with death, although he had not.

We have now quoted every Scripture from the Hebrew Old Testament which contains
the word Sheol. 3 times as "pit," 31 times "grave," and 31 times "hell." Not once
did we read of "PUNISHMENT," "TORTURE IN FIRE," or a place
of "EVERLASTING" anything. We have clearly seen that both the righteous and the
unrighteous go to this same condition and place called Sheol. It is spoken of literally,
figuratively, symbolically, and poetically.


When it comes to matters regarding the salvation of all mankind theologians have found
it necessary to distort many verses of Scripture to force a compliance with their pagan
teaching on the subject. I will try to clear up all of the difficulties and contradictions
associated with sheol/hades because of the pagan Christian teaching of an eternal
hell. Strong's Concordance, Dictionaries of Hebrew and Greek, and the Bible, is all we
need to make sense of it all.

Although Sheol is translated "grave" 31 times in Scripture, the question remains,

should it even be translated grave at all? We will prove that it should NOT be
translated "hell," but should it ever be translated "grave," seeing that there is another
Hebrew term used in Scripture that specifically means Grave.

It will all make sense when we come to realize that there are two aspects regarding
the Graves that are spoken of at some length in Scripture:

1. The PHYSICAL GRAVE, which includes the location and type of burial.

2. The CONDITIONAL GRAVE, which tells us why someone is in the

grave, what their sins were, what their present condition is, and what their losses

The Hebrew qeber qibrah means: sepulchre, burying place, grave (Strong's
Hebrew Dictionary). It is used many times in Scripture, as in Job 21:32:

"Yet shall he be brought to the grave [Heb: qeber qibrah], and shall
remain in the tomb."

This verse pretty much defines grave by stating that a person brought to
the grave would remain in the tomb (the "tomb" being a "burying place"). But
does not sheol/hades also mean: sepulchre, burying place, grave?
Strong's definition of qeber gibrah is quite accurate and accords perfectly with the
Scriptures. His definition of Sheol, however, leaves much to be desired:

"Sheol—hades, the world of the dead (as if a subterranean retreat), including its
accessories and inmates: grave, hell, and pit." "The world of the dead, a
subterranean retreat, including its accessories and inmates".

Nowhere is the grave called "a world," and nowhere are there "inmates"—that is
living residents in the grave. Strong's word "retreat," however, is interesting. Here's
an American Heritage College Dictionary definition of, "retreat, a place
affording peace, quite, privacy, or security." Sounds more like a country club in
the Caribbean, than the hell of Christendom.

However, the last three words he uses to define sheol—"grave, hell, pit" could all
be correct and acceptable if we use and understand "hell" to be only what it was
defined as and used as in Old English—"to cover or conceal."

Since STRONG defines Sheol as hades, let's look at his definition of hades.

"#86. HADES, from 1 (as negative particle) and 1492; properly unseen, i.e. 'Hades' or
the place (state) of departed souls—hell, grave"

Again, "hell and grave" would be acceptable if we understand "hell" to

mean "conceal or cover" rather than, "a place where sinners are tortured
with Satan and devils in literal fire for eternity."

The "grave" is the common denominator in all verses regarding Sheol. But why didn't
the writers use the Hebrew qeber qibrah which most definitely means grave? Why
are both terms used if what is always meant is "the grave?"

ANSWER: The Hebrew qeber qibrah

always has reference to the geographical location and vessel of internment for the body.
For example, is the body buried on the top of a mountain in a cave, down in the valley in
the ground, or maybe in a garden in a tomb? The first time qeber qibrah is used in the
Scriptures is a perfect example:

"And Jacob set a pillar upon her grave [Heb: qeber qibrah]: that is the
pillar of Rachel's grave [qeber qibrah] unto this day" Gen. 35:20.

Here's another:

"My father made me swear, saying, Lo, I die [am dying] in my

grave [Heb: qeber qibrah—grave, sepulchre, burying place or tomb] which I
have digged for me in the land of Canaan, THERE shall they bury
me" Gen. 50:5.
Okay then, if the "qeber qibrah—grave" is the location and type of burying place,
what does "sheol—grave" mean? Does Sheol then fit the description and definition
of a grave? Yes, it does, but with an added dimension. The "sheol—
grave" addresses not so much the location or type of burying place, but rather the
CONDITIONS surrounding the person(s) entombed.

Here are just some of the things associated with Sheol as a grave:

 darkness, corruption, worms, rest in dust (Job 17:13-16).

 down to sheol is DEATH and up from sheol is to MAKE ALIVE
(I Sam. 2:6).
 a CHANGE must come to live again (Job 14:14).
 no thanks in sheol (Psalm 6:5).
 it is silent in sheol (Psalm 31:17).
 the DEAD are in sheol (Proverbs 9:18).
 souls are REDEEMED from sheol (Psalm 49:15).
 there is no work, device, knowledge or wisdom in sheol
(Eccl. 9:10).
 no praise in sheol (Isa. 38:18—not even from the RIGHTEOUS who
are there)
 God will RANSOM souls from sheol (Hosea 13:14).
 sheol is a place of DEATH (Psalm 55:15).
 the DEAD are in sheol (Psalm 139:8).
 God is in sheol (Psalm 139:8).
 God will DESTROY sheol (Hosea 13:14).

Now seriously and honestly and scripturally, is there ANY torture in fire going on
in Sheol? Is there ANY human activity whatsoever going on in Sheol? Is there even
consciousness in Sheol? Of course not—SHEOL IS DEAD! But Christians ASSURE
us that sheol/hades/hell is a place of extreme activity, pain, screaming, torture,
fire, demons, Satan, etc., etc., etc. Let me make this so simple a child can
understand it. Remember the Christian definition of hell in our dictionary:

The American Heritage Collegiate Dictionary:

the abode of condemned souls and devils... the place of eternal
punishment for the wicked after death, presided over by Satan… a state
of separation of God… a place of evil, misery, discord or
destruction… torment, anguish."
Okay then, here are ten bold key words which define "hell." If these are the proper
words and phrases to describe and define "hell" in our English Bibles, then we should
find these ten words scattered all through the verses of Scripture which speak
of sheol/grave/hell.

Below I list all of the 65 Scriptural references to Sheol in the King James. It appears
that they might have used the flip of a coin to determine whether to translate any
particular verse as heads or tails. I do this to impress upon your minds the unscholarly,
unscriptural, and silliness employed to come up with 31 graves and 31 hells by using the
same one word, Sheol.

In one verse they would have us believe God is speaking of an "ETERNAL LIFE OF
TORTURE IN FIRE," and in another verse using the very same word Sheol, they
would have us believe all are "DEAD." And they did this SIXTY-FIVE TIMES!

Sheol Translated

Deut. 32:22 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire

Gen. 37:35 "grave" burying place of the dead
II Sam. 22:6 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Gen. 42:38 "grave" burying place of the dead
Job 11:8 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Gen. 44:29 "grave" burying place of the dead
Job 26:6 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Gen. 44:31 "grave" burying place of the dead
Psalm 9:17 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
I Sam. 2:6 "grave" burying place of the dead
Psalm 16:10 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
I Kings 2:6 "grave" burying place of the dead
Psalm 18:5 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
I Kings 2:9 "grave" burying place of the dead
Psalm 55:15 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Job 7:9 "grave" burying place of the dead
Psalm 86:13 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Job 14:13 "grave" burying place of the dead
Psalm 116:3 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Job 17:13 "grave" burying place of the dead
Psalm 139:8 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Job 21:13 "grave" burying place of the dead
Prov. 5:5 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Job 24:19 "grave" burying place of the dead
Prove. 7:27 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Psalm 6:5 "grave" burying place of the dead
Prov. 9:18 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Psalm 30:3 "grave" burying place of the dead
Prov. 15:11 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Psalm 31:17 "grave" burying place of the dead
Prov. 15:24 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Psalm 49:14 "grave" burying place of the dead
Prov. 23:14 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Psalm 49:14 "grave" burying place of the dead
Prov. 27:20 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Psalm 49:15 "grave" burying place of the dead
Isa. 5:14 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Psalm 88:3 "grave" burying place of the dead
Isa. 14:9 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Psalm 89:48 "grave" burying place of the dead
Isa. 14:15 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Prov. 1:12 "grave" burying place of the dead
Isa. 28:15 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Prov. 30:16 "grave" burying place of the dead
Isa. 28:18 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Ecc. 9:10 "grave" burying place of the dead
Isa. 57:0 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Song 8:6 "grave" burying place of the dead
Ezek. 31:16 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Isa. 14:11 "grave" burying place of the dead
Ezek. 31:17 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Isa. 38:10 "grave" burying place of the dead
Ezek. 32:21 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Isa. 38:18 "grave" burying place of the dead
Ezek. 32:27 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Ezek. 31:15 "grave" burying place of the dead
Amos 9:2 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Hosea 13:14 "grave" burying place of the dead
Jonah 2:2 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Hosea 13:14 "grave" burying place of the dead
Hab. 2:5 "hell" eternal life of torture in fire
Psalm 141:7 "grave" burying place of the dead
Num. 16:30 "pit" a huge hole in the earth
Num. 16:33 "pit" a huge hole in the earth
Job 17:16 "pit" a place of rest in the dust

Not once in all 65 verses where we find the word Sheol do we find a word associated
with Christianity's hell. What do we find in these verses then?

Well, for one thing, in these 65 verses we find the words "death," "dead," or some
form of dying (as in 'slain with the sword'). BOGUSITY!!!

THEY LOOK LIKE SHENANIGANS (Questionable Act, Trick, Prank) TO ME

Let's consider some very interesting translations:

In Psalm 88:6 "You have laid me in the LOWEST PIT [Heb: bor—a hole, a
pit], in darkness, in the deeps."

And in Psalm 139:15 "My substance was not hid from Thee, when I was
made in secret, and curiously wrought in the LOWEST PARTS of the

But in Deut. 32:22 we read: "For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall
burn unto the LOWEST HELL [Heb: Sheol].

Why "hell?"
Why not "pit?"

We already have Scriptural proof that there are such things as the "lowest
pit" and "lowest parts" with absolutely no connection or reference to any kind of
hellish torture chamber, so why not use "pit" in Deut. 32:22? Actually "grave"
would be better, but since they like to translate Sheol as "pit," why not make it pit
in Deut. 32:22? You tell me. JUST TO MAKE A DOCTRINE STAND. WOULD YOU

In Job 17:13 we read: "If I wait, the grave [Heb: Sheol] is mine house, I
have made MY BED in the darkness"

Here we have God telling us that Job will make his "bed" in the darkness of the sheol-

But in Psalm 139:8 we read: "If I ascend up into heaven, You are there: if I
make MY BED in HELL [Heb: sheol] behold, You are there."
What sense is it for Job to say, "If" he makes his "BED in the sheol-
GRAVE," whereas King David considers, "If" he make his "BED in the sheol-
HELL?" Consider also that when people have been buried in graves from time
immemorial, they are laid down as in a bed (witness the mummies of Egypt), but in what
possible, conceivable way can a person in a "Christian hell" who is supposedly being
tortured in literal fire, be considered to be "in BED?" Do Christians never, ever, EVER
think about what they are reading? Apparently not too often, Clearly,
Psalm 138:8 should be translated "If I make my bed in the GRAVE…"

Furthermore we have Scriptural proof that David was buried in a grave:

"Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David,
that he is both DEAD and BURIED, and his SEPULCHRE is with us unto
this day" Acts 2:29.

And NO, David never went to heaven either:

"For David is not ['is not'—In both Greek and English, that means
"IS NOT'] ascended into the heavens…" (Vs. 34).

In Psalm 31:17 we read: "Let me not be ashamed, O Lord; for I have

called upon Thee; let the wicked be ashamed, and let them be silent in
the grave [Heb: Sheol]."

But in Psalm 55:15 we read: "Let death seize upon them, and let them go
down quick into hell [Heb: Sheol]: for wickedness is in their dwellings
and among them."

Was this another toss of the coin—heads it's "grave" or tails it's hell? In one verse the
King James sends the wicked to the grave, and in another the King James sends the


"I WILL RANSOM THEM from the power of sheol [grave]…"

Notice the context of this verse in this chapter as it is speaking of SINFUL Israel. Israel
has sinned greatly, they have died, but notice God's ultimate mercy upon them:

"O Israel, you have destroyed yourself, BUT in Me is your help" (Vs. 9).
"SURELY [Gk: ge—"a primary particle of emphasis, yet, at least, besides, doubtless,
SURELY"], He Who spares not His own Son, but gives Him up for us ALL,
how shall He not, together with Him, also be graciously granting us
ALL?" Rom. 8:32, Concordant Literal New Testament.

Unrepentant sinning Israel, Sodom, Jerusalem, all the Hitlers of the world and every
person who has never even heard the name of Jesus Christ will be raised from the dead
and JUDGED in the Great White Throne / Lake of Fire / Second Death Judgment, and
then all humanity will be saved and God will be "ALL in All" (I Cor. 15:28).

There will never be death again, as it will be completely abolished (I Cor. 15:26) by
being destroyed along with hades/sheol in the Lake of God's Spiritual Consuming
Fire Rev. 20:14.


There is not one single word in the entirely of the Hebrew Old Testament Scriptures that
speaks of the dead in Sheol being tortured or burned with fire. There is a Scripture
however that speaks of a "refiner's fire," but the time setting for this fire is not
the Old Testament, but rather the New Testament.

Israel and especially the priests mocking ask: "WHERE is the God of
judgment?" (Last phrase in Mal. 2:17).

To which God answers:

"Behold, I will send My Messenger before Me: and the Lord, Whom you
seek, shall suddenly come to His temple [His people in whom He dwells,
I Cor. 3; 16], even the Messenger of the covenant [the NEW covenant],
whom you delight in: behold, He shall come, says the Lord of hosts.

But who may abide the day of His coming? And who shall stand when
He appears? For He is like A REFINER'S FIRE, and like FULLERS' SOAP:
And He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and He shall purify
the sons of Levi…" Mal. 3:1-3a.

Just who are the "sons of Levi" under the New Covenant? Why they are
the "chosen elect FEW."

Peter describes them:

"But you [those chosen for salvation in this church era] are a chosen generation,
a royal PRIESTHOOD, and holy nation, a peculiar people; that you
should show forth the praises of Him who has called you out of
darkness into His marvellous light: Which in time past were NOT a
people, but are NOW THE PEOPLE OF GOD…"
I Peter 2:9-10.

Ironically, it is the "people who were NOT a people" that make up the New
Covenant "royal priesthood" (II Pet. 2:9).

It is the "uncircumcision who are now God's circumcision people"

(Phil. 3:3).

It is the GENTILES who are God's New Covenant "JEW which is one
inwardly" (Rom. 2:28).

It is the GENTILES who are the New Covenant SPIRITUAL "Israel OF GOD"
(Gal. 6:16).

Notice that Peter calls us "a ROYAL priesthood." The word "royal" is translated
from the Greek, basileios, and it means "kingly."Peter is speaking of " a KINGLY
priesthood" or "KING/PRIESTS." Yes, that is exactly what God calls us:

"And has made us unto our God KINGS AND PRIESTS, and we shall
reign on the earth" (Rev. 5:10 & Rev. 2:26-27).

Continuing in Mal. 3:3 "…and purge them as gold and silver…"

Now where do we read of this in the New Testament/New Covenant? Paul makes clear
to us that only the "gold, silver, and precious stones" of God's word in us will
survive the "refiner's fire":

"Now if any man build upon the Foundation [Jesus Christ] gold, silver,
precious stones [these are refined and purified and made much more valuable by
the fire], [or] wood, hay, stubble [these are totally consumed and burned up by the
fire]: Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare
it, because it shall be revealed by FIRE; [The 'Refiner's fire.' 'For our God is a
CONSUMING [spiritual] FIRE,' Heb. 12:29]; and the fire shall try every man's
work of what sort it is. If any man's work abides which he has built
thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be
burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself SHALL BE SAVED; yet so as
by fire" I Cor. 3:12-15.

Concluding Mal. 3, 3:
"That they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness"
It is this "offering in RIGHTEOUSNESS" that the "kings of the earth
[we, the chosen elect few, ARE the 'kings of the earth Rev. 5:10] do bring their
glory and honour ['an offering in righteousness'] into it [New Jerusalem out of
Heaven]" Rev. 21:24.


Does this mean that the Old Testament contains not a word about an afterlife? No, not
quite. There are a few hints and prophecies that confirm the dead will live again, but not
a word that the DEAD ARE ALREADY LIVING.

Recorded in job:

"If a man dies, shall he live again? All the days of my appointed time
will I wait, till my change come. You shall call, and I will answer you:
you will have a desire to the work of your hands" Job 14:14.

Job was given to understand that there is coming life after the grave. Not IN
the grave but after a period of "waiting and after a "change" takes place.

Recorded in psalms:

"Like sheep they are laid in the grave; death shall feed on them; and
the upright shall have dominion over them in the morning, and their
beauty shall consume in the grave from their dwelling. But God
will redeem my soul from the power of the grave [Heb: Sheol]
(Psalm 49:14-15).

David realizes as does the writer of Ecclesiastes that a person dies just like an animal
and both are consumed away in the grave. But, David was also given to understand that
God will "redeem" his soul (the real, sentient David, preserved by God until
resurrection back to life into a new body). This will take place in either of two
resurrections of the dead.

Recorded in the prophets

"And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake,
some to everlasting [Heb: 'eonian'] life, and some to shame and
everlasting [Heb: 'eonian'] contempt" Daniel 12:2.

Daniel does not tell us when these two resurrections of awakening out of sleep will
occur, only that they will. We know from New Testament revelation that the First
happens prior to Christ's reign and the Latter happens after His 1000 year
reign. But the hope of an afterlife was made known to at least a few of the Old
Testament writers. Interestingly, Moses never once makes mention of any such thing as
a punishment upon the wicked after death, or a blessing upon the righteous after death.
We have record of but a handful of men who even knew of an afterlife, but not one of
them suggests and endless punishment for the wicked. From where then did this
teaching originate?


Mis-translations and mis-interpretations

Unfortunately, the parable of Lazarus and the Rich man has become a sort of
theological passport to the annihilation of hundreds of plain and exact verses of
Scripture. Next to the gross error in translating the Greek aion (a period of time with
a beginning and an end) into an English eternity (no time at all, neither having a
beginning nor an ending), I know of no greater misrepresentation of any section of
Scripture than this parable. I will be using both the KJV and the Concordant Literal
New Testament when quoting Scripture in this paper.

Can those who teach that Luke 16 is not a parable, prove their position? No, they
cannot. Can it then be proved by the Scriptures that this is a parable? Yes, it can.
Quite easily, I might add.


Let me give you a technical definition of a parable followed by a more simple

definition: (1) "Parable: [Greek, para bole‘= BESIDE CAST]--A statement ‗cast
beside‘ or parallel to its real spiritual significance, a figure of likeness in
action." GREEK-ENGLISH KEYWORD CONCORDANCE p. 216. (2) "A short and
simple tale based on familiar things meant to convey a much deeper and profound
moral or spiritual truth," WEBSTER’S DICTIONARY. In Old English it was called a

Jesus spoke in parables throughout His whole ministry. In Matthew 13 we are

given seven different parables. No parable is literal or historical. The second we
make a parable literal, it ceases to be a parable. Jesus spoke ONLY in parables (not
true life or historical stories) among the masses of people who followed Him
wherever He went.

I am going to some length to demonstrate the absolute absurdity of teaching this

parable of Lazarus or any other parable as a literal and historical event.


Is Luke 16:19-31 a "parable?" Many in orthodoxy say that it absolutely is not a

parable because a person is mentioned by name and identified as a specific and
particular person. This is NONSENSE, IS A TWIST OF DOCTRINE. The mention of
an identifiable person is not, however, the test of a parable. They are saying is
not a parable in order for the doctrine of burning in hell to stand, but
that is another big lie, Besides other parables do mention identifiable persons,
but they are still parables:

Mark 4:15 Mentions Satan

Matt. 13:37 Mentions The Son of man
Matt. 13:39 Mentions The devil
Matt. 15:13 Mentions God the Father
II Sam. 12:7 Is said to be King David
Ezek. 23:1-4 Mentions Aholah and Aholibah
Luke 4:23 Jesus applies ‗Physician‘ to HIMSELF


Jesus spoke to the Pharisees and multitudes in parables:

"And He begins to speak to them in parables." (Mk. 12:1).
Jesus spoke to the multitudes in parables ONLY:

"All these things Jesus speaks in parables to the throngs, and apart
from a PARABLE He spoke nothing to them..." (Mat. 13:34).

Jesus spoke in parables so that his listeners would not understand Him:
"Wherefore art Thou speaking in parables to them? ... To you has it
been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of the heavens, yet
to those it has NOT been given." (Matt.13:10-11).

Not even the apostles understood these parables (Lk16:14)!

Jesus had to explain their meaning to them in private (Mat. 13:18, 36),
(Mat. 15:15), etc.

The fact that Jesus spoke to the masses in parables only, ought to be sufficient
Scriptural evidence to anyone that Lazarus and the Rich man is indeed a parable.
There are, however, many many more proofs.


What is the setting of this Lazarus parable? Actually it is part of a five-part parable
beginning in Chapter 15 of Luke. Here is the reason for these five parables in a

"Now ALL the tribute collectors and sinners were coming near Him
to be hearing Him. And both the Pharisees and the scribes
grumbled, saying that ‗This man sinner is receiving, and is eating
with them!" (Luke 15:1).

Vs. 2: "Now He told them [the tax collectors, sinners, Pharisees, and
scribes] THIS PARABLE, saying..."
Jesus then gives them FIVE parables, one after the other. The phrase "THIS
parable" certainly is not limited to the next, one, parable only!

These are ALL parables and most scholars recognize them as parables.
My Oxford KJV even has at the top of the page over the parable of the prodigal son,
these words: "The parable of the prodigal son." The text does not call it a parable,
but certainly it follows that it IS the THIRD PART of a five-part parable.

Notice the transition that Jesus uses between the lost sheep and the lost coin? He
says, "Neither..." Some translations have "Or..." This word certainly connects it to the
previous parable! Now notice Chapter 16 first verse, "And He said ALSO unto his
disciples..." "Also" refers back to all that went before in this five-part parable, and
now Jesus is continuing with the same train of thought with the fourth of this five-part

Notice next the introduction of the third, fourth, and fifth parables:

"A CERTAIN MAN..." (15:11)

"There was A CERTAIN RICH MAN..." (16:1).

"There was A CERTAIN RICH MAN..." (16:19).

Again, it is clear that these are THREE parables of a five-part parable!


Parables are not to be taken literally, but "Literal where and when possible." They
are to be understood "figuratively." The real meaning is not in what they literally
say, but in what the symbols and figurative language represent. That‘s why they are
called "parables." This is axiomatic!
Let us turn to some parables for proof of this point:

The Prodigal Son (Luke 15:32). "...thy brother was dead..."

Comment: He wasn‘t literally "dead." He came home again "alive." God did not
resurrect him from the dead. The Resurrection is yet future.
So the prodigal was NOT literally dead, but from the perspective of his father, he was
as good as dead or he could have been considered Spiritually dead.

Parable of the Sower (Matt. 13:3-23). "And when he sowed, some seeds
fell by the way side; and the fowls came and devoured them up."

Comment: This parable isn‘t teaching horticulture. It‘s about "the word of the
kingdom" and how different people receive it! Birds don‘t literally devour the words of

Sowing Ideal Seed (Matt. 13:24). "Yet, while the men are drawsing, his
enemy came and sows darnel..."

Comment: The enemy "came." Past tense. Is this, therefore, an historical fact?
No. Read verse 39: "Now the harvest is the conclusion of the eon." This
eon hasn‘t come to an "end" yet. And the "harvest" is people not grains and

Parable of mote in brother‘s eye (Lk. 6:39-42). "Now why are you observing
the mote in your brother‘s eye, yet the beam in your own eye your
are not considering?"

Comment: A beam is a long piece of timber. How is it possible to have a long piece
of timber in one‘s eye? I know people who could fit it into their mouth, but eye, never.
This parable is about morality, not body organs and building materials.
Is it not obvious that the literal, physical language in all parables must be interpreted
as a higher, spiritual lesson?

If the parable of Lazarus and the rich man is both literal and an historical fact, then it
contradicts not only the laws of physics and logic, but also literally hundreds of plain
verses of Scripture.

People are taught that the parables are real stories that Jesus told to help the people
understand His teaching better. That‘s partly due to the fact that with many of the
parables we are also given the INTERPRETATION! How many would understand
these parables if we were not given the interpretation of them? Who would have
known Who the sower of seed is? Who would know what the stony places are? Who
would understand what the birds represent? Who would know what the good soil

Sure, it‘s easy now, Jesus TOLD US THE ANSWERS! But He ONLY told His
disciples the answers, NOT THE MULTITUDES to whom He spoke!


According to the popular teaching of this parable, the Rich man is in an eternal Hell
of torture and Lazarus is in eternal Heavenly bliss. Well let‘s be sure then to pay
special attention to those traits of character that have separated these two
individuals into two entirely different realms.

Below is listed in each column the exact "literal" facts regarding each man‘s
character, virtue and deeds that is the reason for a supposed fate of either eternal
Hell or eternal Heaven:


He was RICH ... Vs. 19 He was POOR ... Vs. 20

He wore PURPLE & CAMBRIC ... Vs. 19

He made MERRY (Gk: cheerful, & glad) Probably CRIPPLED ("was
SPLENDIDLY [like Angels-Acts 10:30] laid") Vs. 20
DAILY ... Vs. 19 DISEASED ("full of sores")
Vs. 20

He had a nice HOUSE ("his gate") Vs. 20

He gave Lazarus FOOD [Gk. psichion, "a HUNGRY ("desiring to be fed")

particle of food left over"-scraps] Vs. 21 Vs. 21

He DIED and was [Gk. entombed] Vs. 22 He DIED Vs. 22

He lifts up his eyes in [Gk. hades "the Is "carried by the angels into
UNSEEN or IMPERCEPTIBLE] Vs. 23 Abraham's bosom" Vs. 22

He is in TORMENTS ... Vs. 22

He's ALIVE with a BODY, "eyes,' Vs. 23 He's ALIVE with a BODY, "finger
" Vs. 24

He desires a drop of WATER ... Vs. 24

In life he got GOOD things ... Vs. 25 In life he got EVIL things ... Vs. 25

He is respectful toward authority ("FATHER

Abraham") Vs. 24

He was TORMENTED ... Vs. 25 Was COMFORTED [Gk. parakaleo

= "to comfort when in
distress"] Vs. 25

He could not cross the GULF ... Vs. 26 He could not cross the GULF
... Vs. 26

Exhibits LOVE toward his family even while

in torment ("I have five brothers") Vs. 28

PLEADS for their welfare ("Nay..") Vs. 30

Examine these two columns closely. Is it not obvious that what is literally revealed
here does not lend itself to an eternal life of torture for the Rich man or an eternal life
of heavenly bliss for the poor man? Where else in Scripture do the character traits in
the left column come under eternal condemnation? And where else in Scripture do
the character traits in the right column bring a promise of salvation in Heaven?
Seriously, WHERE?
From what is literally stated about these two individuals it is hard to find
condemnation or praise for either party. We know for sure that the Rich man is in a
state of condemnation and that Lazarus is in a state of consolement, but there is
nothing in the narrative to tell us why this is so.

If taken literally, this parable consists of statements that are illogical, unscriptural,
contradictory, and impossible. But, when we understand the symbolism of this
parable, it opens up our understanding to God‘s dealing with all peoples on earth!
We must know the real identity of these two individuals before we can know that their
treatment is a just treatment based on their lives and based on God‘s grace.

The Rich man received "good things" in life and Lazarus received "evil things" in life.
That is obviously true. However, neither of those is Scriptural grounds for either
being rewarded or condemned. Where? Present a Scripture. Christ said that it is
difficult for a rich man to inherit the Kingdom, for example, and that certainly is true.
But it is not the fact of being rich that makes this so, but rather the power that wealth
has over the soul to keep one from pursuing spiritual things. Some people are "rich"
and are right with God. Other people are "rich" and are not right with God. But the
bottom line is how God has constituted the person himself that makes the difference,
not the fact that he is wealthy.

Don‘t suppose that I am siding with the Rich man at the expense of Lazarus. I am
not. I am merely showing how ludicrous it is to insist that this parable is "literal."


Verse by verse now we will see if this parable can possibly be taken literally.
Luke 16:19:


"Now a certain man was rich..."

Many reading these words immediately conclude that being rich must be a sin. This
is the one outstanding feature of this man--he is RICH. Is that a sin? Abraham, just
talking a distance away here, was very rich (Gen. 13:2). Isaac was rich, Jacob was
rich, Joseph was rich, David (a man after God‘s own heart) was rich. Job was the
richest man in all the East (Job. 1:3). And it was God Who blessed them, that‘s
why they were rich. Being rich is no character flaw or sin.

Besides, the Scriptures say:

"...God is not to be sneered at, for whatsoever a man may be

sowing, this shall be reaping also..." (Gal. 6:7).

And "...who is sowing sparingly, sparingly shall be reaping also, and

who is sowing bountifully, bountifully shall be reaping also..."
(II Cor. 9:6-7).
"...he dressed in purple and fine linen (cambric) [Gk bussos = COTTON]
probably of a fine quality, perhaps a cloth with cotton in the warp and flax in the

Why should we care what color or what fabric of clothing he wore? Fine clothing are
not a sin. What does that have to do with a man‘s character, virtue, or deeds? If
taken "literally," nothing. But since this is "symbolic" it then is THE KEY TO

The description of the Rich man‘s clothing and the position of Lazarus in Abraham‘s
bosom are the two vital keys in understanding this whole parable.

"...daily making merry [Gk. cheerful & glad] splendidly..."

Is having a cheerful and glad spirit a sin? I don‘t think so.

Paul says: "...that I may be of good cheer..." (Phil. 2:19).

David‘s heart was "glad" (Acts 2:26). And the angels

dressed "splendidly" (Acts 10:30).


"Now there was a certain poor man..."

Being poor is no virtue! In fact the Scriptures have a lot to say about poverty:
"...a little folding of the hands to sleep: So shall thy poverty
come..." (Prov. 6:10-11).

"He becometh poor that dealeth with a slack hand..." (Prov. 10:4).

"...The soul of the sluggard desireth, and hath nothing..."

(Prov. 13:4).

Many Scriptures show poverty to be the direct result of sin.

Again, Gal. 6:7, II Cor. 9:6-7. It is God Who makes both rich and poor
(I Sam. 2:7).

"...named Lazarus..." [Heb: helpless]

Why should we know his name if this is literal? Lazarus was a common name. And
who would ever want to be named "Helpless?"

We are not given the name of the Rich man. What does it matter one way or the
other what his name is if this is a literal story and we don‘t know which Lazarus this
was anyway. Ah, but since this is a "parable" it does matter, and we CAN know
which Lazarus this really is and who the rich man really is.
"...who had been cast at his portal (gate)..."

Being thrown out into the street is no virtue.

"...having sores [Gk. elkos = DRAWER] (ulcers) ..."

Being sick and diseased is not a virtue. Diseases associated with "the botch, open
sores, boils and ulcers" are very often a direct curse from God in the Scriptures.
See: Ex. 9:2, Job 2:7, Deut. 28:27, 35, Rev. 16:2, and many others.

"...yearning to be satisfied from the scraps (not crumbs).

[Gk. psichion = SCRAPS--A particle of food which is left over after eating] which
are falling from the rich man‘s table."

It is no virtue to be begging for bread. "Crumbs falling from a table" is an idiom, not
literal. Rich people do not eat like pigs! A few "crumbs," is possible, but
crumbs are not enough to feed a hungry ant, let alone a grown man.
Besides, if Lazarus is a godly man why is he begging food?

Read ….. Psa. 37:25: "...Yet have I not seen the righteous forsaken,

There is absolutely nothing in the description of Lazarus that would indicate

he was a godly man. But when we identify him, there is much to show that he
was a godly man, and that his poverty and sickness was not that of a literally
diseased beggar in the street.

"But the curs (wild dogs) also, coming, licked his ulcers."

It is a dog‘s nature to "lick sores," but they didn‘t come to this man‘s house for that
purpose. They came there to get "scraps" of food as well.

However, think for a moment. What does this bit of information add to our
understanding of this story if it is to be taken "literally?" Nothing! I mean Jesus could
have told us that, "the sky was cloudy" or "the cock was crowing" or "there were
holes in the street." So what? What do "wild dogs" add to our understanding, if it‘s
literal? But we learn in Scripture that "dogs" represent something totally different
from four-legged animals that bark and bite. Here is a real clue as to who Lazarus
and his dog companions really represent. And as this is a parable it was not physical
scraps of literal food that Lazarus and the dogs desired. Who then is this Rich man,
who being tormented, nonetheless, possessed and disseminated (albeit it small
portions) of life-giving food to the poor?

The Rich man, regardless of his character or lack thereof, was obviously blessed of

"The Lord shall make thee plenteous in goods..." (Deut. 28:11).

And "...bless all the work of thine hand" (Vs. 12).

As he sewed, so he reaped (Gal. 6:7, II Cor. 9:6-7).

He got "good things in life" and the Scripture plainly tells us that
"Every GOOD gift is from above..." (Jas. 1:17).

Lazarus was obviously cursed of God:

"...thou shalt. not prosper" (Deut. 28:16).

The "botch and scab" (Vs. 27 & 29).

He obviously sewed sparingly and reaped even more sparingly. When one is
homeless, hungry, and diseased in the street; it doesn‘t get much worse than this.


If this parable is taken literally, we will find more than a few hundred major problems
with the rest of God‘s revealed Word.

One will have to use a black marker or cut from the Bible most verses dealing with
spirit, soul, body, death, resurrection, immortality, grave, hades, sheol, sin,
punishment, chastisement, firstfruits, rewards, justification, reconciliation, prophecy,
grace, salvation and the sovereignty of God, just to name a few! All of these
contradict the idea that this parable can be literal. All of them.

"Now the poor man came to die and he is carried away by

messengers into Abraham‘s bosom."

Impossible. This statement if taken literally is neither historical nor Scriptural.

Many say this represents Lazarus in Heaven.

How, pray tell, could Lazarus be in Heaven while his Lord was still on the

"Yet now Christ has been roused from among the dead, the firstfruit
of those who are reposing (a state of rest or inactivity)." (I Cor. 15:20).

Abraham wasn‘t the "firstfruit." Lazarus wasn‘t the "firstfruit." JESUS CHRIST
WAS THE FIRSTFRUIT OF THEM THAT SLEPT! The latter fruit, Paul tells
us, "are [still] reposing."

Jesus plainly said, not only had David NOT ascended into the
heavens, but that
"NO MAN has ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from
heaven."(John 3:13).

Teaching that this parable is a literal historical fact makes Christ out to be a liar.
When our Lord was alive on this earth giving us this parable, He said:
"...NO MAN HAS ASCENDED UP TO HEAVEN..." So how can it be said that at the
same time our Lord was telling us that no man has ascended up to heaven, that
Lazarus and Abraham are already up in heaven?


HEAVEN WITH ABRAHAM OR ANYONE ELSE!! So here then is just one of the
hundreds of problems with the Scriptures if we insist this parable is literal.

There are many Scriptures that tell us where a person goes when he "dies." The
Scriptures say he "returns" from where he "came." So if he goes to Heaven,
then he "came" from Heaven; if he goes to Hell, then he "came" from Hell. But
Scriptures do not teach that people "RETURN" to heaven or hell when they
die…The soul always DIE:

"...till you return [Hebrew, shub] unto the ground; for out of it were you
taken: for dust you are, and unto dust shall you RETURN"
(Gen. 3:17-19).

"Remember I pray you that as clay you did make me, and unto dust
you will cause me to RETURN" (Job 10:9).

"You cause man to return unto dust..." (Psa. 90:3).

"His spirit [the Hebrew word here is ruach, spirit, not neshamah, breath] goes
forth, he returns to his earth; in that very day his thoughts
perish" (Psa. 146:3-4).

what does KJV says here?

" gather in their spirit [Hebrew ruach, spirit] they

expire [Hebrew gava, breathe out, gasp, expire], and return to their
dust" (Psa. 104:29).

what does KJV says here?

"For that which befalls the sons of men befalls beasts; ... as the one
dies, so dies the other; yea, they have all one spirit; and man has no
preeminence above the beasts [in death]: for all is vanity. All go unto
one place; all are of the dust, and all return to dust again"
(Eccl. 3:18-21).

Will one contend that BEASTS return to either heaven or hell when they die? Have
we not just read in Eccl. 3:18-21 that "ALL [both men and beasts] go unto
ONE PLACE?" And aren‘t "heaven AND hell" TWO PLACES rather
that "ONE PLACE?"

For sure our Saviour‘s words are so true--the babes in Christ (minors) can
understand these spiritual things, but the wise in the wisdom of this world cannot
understand them.

Here is irrefutable Scriptural proof that when a person dies he returns to the dust.
Messengers or angels don‘t take dead people anywhere when they die. If this is
literal, then they would have had to carry a "dead" Lazarus into the ancient cave of
a "dead" Abraham. The "resurrection" is yet future (I Thess. 4:16:18).

Remember how Paul told us of Hymeneus and Philetus who "...swerve as to truth,
saying that the resurrection has ALREADY OCCURRED [as defenders of a literal
interpretation also contend] subverting the faith of some." (II Tim. 2:18)? Lazarus
was carried (in the parable) into Abraham‘s bosom. Abraham‘s bosom is not the
reward of the saved. Abraham‘s bosom is not Heaven. Furthermore, no more than
one person could fit into Abraham‘s bosom. It‘s a parable.

When Jesus gave this parable was Abraham alive in heaven or dead in his grave?
First notice what Gen. 25:8-9 says:

"Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died ... and his sons Isaac
and Ishmael buried him in a cave..."

When Jesus was teaching these parables Abraham was still dead. "Abraham IS
DEAD" (John 8:52)! After Christ‘s crucifixion and resurrection (nearly 30 years
after) Abraham was still dead.

"By faith Abraham ... sojourns in the land of promise ... he waited for
the city having foundations, whose Artificer and Architect is God ...
In faith DIED ALL THESE [Abraham included], being not requited with
the promises ... for He [God] makes ready for them a city"
(Heb. 11:8,9,10,13,16).

Abraham had not yet as of the writing of the book of Hebrews received the promises
God made to him. Besides Abraham was not promised Heaven, but this earth along
with King David (Jer. 30:9) and the Twelve Apostles who will be ruling
over the twelve tribes of Israel on this earth (Rev. 5:10). And the "City,"
New Jerusalem, comes down from heaven to the New Earth.
By the way, after Christ‘s resurrection, we read that King David as well was also still

"...David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with
us unto this day..." "For David is NOT ascended into the
heavens..." (Acts 2:29 & 34).
So consider: At the time Christ taught this parable, Abraham was STILL DEAD,
David (a man after God‘s own heart) was STILL DEAD and the Scripture specifically
tells us that David DID NOT ASCEND INTO HEAVEN. To remove all speculation
regarding heaven, Christ plainly stated that, "NO MAN HAS ASCENDED INTO
HEAVEN!" Which part of the word "NO" is it that Theologians and Pastors do
not understand?

"Now the rich man also died, and was entombed. And in the
unseen [Gk: hades], lifting up his eyes..." (Vs. 23).

Impossible. He died, was entombed, and lifted up his eyes? Where did he get a
body in hades, seeing that they just sealed his body in a tomb? Have you never
heard of exhuming a body from a grave? Six days, six months, six years after death,
when they open a grave, the body is still there. And it‘s usually rotten and the "eyes"
are decayed away.

"...was entombed...and in the unseen [hades], lifting up his eyes..."

Theologians teach that the grave is one place and hades is another place, then no
man can have his body "entombed" while at the same time the eyes of his body can
be lifted up in a place called "hades." And we know his body was still in the tomb, so
how can he be simultaneously in hades with a new body? – Full of Nonsense!!!

And how could this man "literally" lift up his eyes in "hell" seeing that hell is the
translation of the Greek word hades which means the
UNSEEN or IMPERCEPTIBLE? To "see" one can‘t be in the UNSEEN, nor can it
be a place of NO perception. The parable says that he "died" and was entombed, but
that he "lifts up his eyes" in hades. He can‘t be literally dead and literally alive at the
same time and in two different locations.

Think people of God, holy ghost babies!

Hades is a Greek word (and is synonymous with Sheol in the Hebrew O.T.) and it
has a meaning. The elements are "UN-PERCEIVED." It can be properly translated
into English as "unseen" or "imperceptible." Now how can one "see" in the
unseen?" It‘s very very ridiculous. How can anyone have "perception" in
the "imperceptible?" The dead can‘t "see," It‘s a parable.
There is no consciousness in [Heb: Sheol] or
[Gk: Hades] (Psa.146:4) none. "Sheol" and "Hades" are synonymous in
In Acts 2:27 hades is translated from the Hebrew word sheol.

"His spirit [hebrew=ruach] goes forth, he returns to his earth; in that

very day his thoughts perish" (Psa. 146-3-4).

And "...there is no works, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in

sheol where you go" (Eccl. 9:10).
"Device" [Heb. mchesh- bown--contrivance, intelligence, reason]. Do these two
verses in Ecclesiasties sound like "dark sayings?" or "tricky proverbs?" or "difficult
parables?" or "deep mysteries?" They are plain, simple statements of facts that any
child can understand! But notice how they absolutely contradict the
"consciousness in hades" theory.

One more Scriptural proof on this point: "And it came to pass, that the
beggar DIED ... the rich man also DIED..." (Luke 16:22).

So from verse 22 onward, the beggar and the rich man are IN DEATH!

Now, Psalm 6:5:

LORD], in THE GRAVE who shall give thee [The LORD] thanks?"

So, is it possible to take this parable literally without violating Scripture after Scripture
after Scripture? I think not.


According to many, But according to GOD,
these literally happen in nothing happens in
Hades: Hades:

Do these things literally take "lifting up his eyes" "No work"

place in hades or "existing in torments" "No device"
only figuratively? "is seeing" No contrivance
"he shouting, said" No intelligence
"cool my tongue" No reason
"I am pained" "No knowledge"
"you are in pain" "No wisdom"
"Not anything"
"No thoughts"

In the center column we have seeing, feeling, hearing, talking, and reason. In the
right column we have nothing. The center column is based on one parable that
should never be taken literally while the right column is quoted right from the


I have heard many jeer the idea that souls "sleep" in death, Although the
phrase "soul sleep" itself is unscriptural; the idea that the dead are "sleeping" is
most Scriptural.

"And the Lord said unto Moses, Behold, thou shalt sleep with thy
fathers..." (Deut. 31:16).
"And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou [David] shalt sleep with thy
fathers. (II Sam. 7:12).

"David slept with his fathers..." (I Ki. 2:10).

"Solomon slept with his fathers..." (I Ki. 11:43).

Job said, "...for now shall I sleep in the dust..." (Job 7:21).

Get this one: David said

"...lest I sleep the sleep of DEATH..." (Psa. 13:3).

"For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and
many sleep [are dead]" (I Cor. 11:30).

"Behold, I show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep ...

the dead shall be raised..." (I Cor. 15:51-52).

"...the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which

are asleep" (I Thes. 4:14).

"...My daughter is even now dead ... the maid is not dead,
but sleepeth." (Mat. 9:18 & 24).

"For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of
God, fell on sleep and was laid unto his fathers, and saw
corruption." (Acts 13:36).

It is said even of our own Lord:

"But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruit of
them that slept" (I Cor. 15:20), etc, etc.

Now I believe all of these Scriptures. Either Abraham is dead, buried and sleeping
with his fathers, just as Moses, David, etc., or these Scriptures can‘t be trusted.
By the way, where do we read of "heaven" in this parable? There is not the
slightest hint of the word heaven in this parable! Abraham‘s "bosom" is no more
heaven than my bosom is heaven.

Interestingly, not only did all these patriarchs go to sleep, but they went to
sleep with their fathers, and many of their fathers were idolaters!

So there we have a dozen Scriptures stating that God likens death to sleep. In what
way is being conscious and tortured in the flames of Hell analogous
to "sleep?" God says death is "sleep." Now in what way is conscious torture in
Hell fire analogous to "sleep?" In what way is a blissful life in Heaven analogous
to "sleep?" Well, of course, it‘s not analogous at all. Yet God plainly says, many
times, that death is "sleep" God awakens dead people out of sleep.

Let me give you a Scripture that will "lay to rest" this issue once and for all. What
happens after one dies:

"If a man dies, shall he live again? All the days of my appointed time
will I wait, till my change comes. Thou shalt call, and I will answer
thee; thou wilt have a desire to the work of thine hands."
(Job 14:14-15).

When a person dies, he must: WAIT ... FOR APPOINTED TIME ... TILL CHANGE

When Jesus taught this parable there were no Greek Scriptures. So when this "rich
man died" he went to Sheol [Heb. the unseen or imperceptible, the abode of the
dead, the grave] It‘s the same sheol that Christ‘s soul went to at death:

Psalm 16:10--"For Thou will not leave my soul in the unseen [Sheol]."
This verse is quoted in the New Testament Greek:

Acts 2:27--"For Thou wilt not be forsaking my soul in the

unseen [Gk. Hades]."

Sheol and Hades are synonymous. The Old Testament says Christ‘s soul went
to "Sheol," the New Testament says His soul went to "Hades."

We know that Christ was the "firstfruit" of them that slept (I Cor. 15:20, 42,
43, 52, 53, 55, I Thes. 4:16-18). The "dead in Christ" are
now "ASLEEP" according to the Scriptures. YET STILL THEY ARE


Read 1Cor. 15 again.

"Christ died for our sins," "He was buried," "He rose again the third day."
All right, let‘s be Scripturally exact.

SPIRIT: When Christ "died," where did His "spirit" go? Scripture --
Luke 23:46: "Father, into thy hands am I committing
My spirit."

Comment: Do other Scriptures verify this truth that at death man's spirit returns
to God Who gave it? Yes:
"Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was; and
the spirit shall return to the God Who gave it" (Eccl.

BODY: Where did Christ's "body" go at death? Matt. 27:59-60:

"And when Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it

in a clean linen cloth, and laid it in his own new
tomb ... "

Comment: Do other Scriptures verify this truth that dead bodies are normally
buried or entombed? Yes:

" ... David, that he is both dead and buried, and his
sepulchre is with us unto this day."(Acts 2:29).

Do dead bodies normally begin to decay and stink after a few days?

"Martha ... Lord, by this time he stinketh: for he hath

been dead four days." (John 11:39).

Would Christ's body have started to decay had not God

miraculously prevented it? Yes:

" ... nor was His flesh acquainted with decay."

(Acts 2:3).

Was Christ (Himself) said to be where His body was? Yes:

"They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre

...‖ (Acts 20:2).

Comment: Do other Scriptures verify this truth that

the "person" or "personality" if you will, or whatever you want the
pronoun "He" to represent, is where the body is? Yes:

" ... David ... he is buried ... " (Acts 2:29) It's "his
spirit" and "his soul" but it's "he" that is said to be buried with
the body.

SOUL: When Christ died, where did His soul go? "For Thou wilt not be
forsaking my soul in the unseen [Hades] [KJV=HELL]"
(Acts 2:27).
Comment: Do other Scriptures verify this truth that at death the soul goes to the
unseen (hades)? Yes:

Psa. 49:15 ―... redeem my soul from the power of

the grave [Heb. sheol] [KJV=HELL]."
Now, back to the parable:


"...being in torments..."

What are these "torments" that the Rich man is experiencing? Is it physical pain
from having his skin burned off of his body by real flames of fire? What a marvelous
thing it is that we can have access to the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts from which
our modern language bibles have been translated. We can check every word that
has been translated into our English bibles. And now, we shall do just that.
In Vs. 23 we have the word "torments" In Vs. 24 and 25 we have the
word "tormented." These words are not translated from the same Greek word,
however. And there is a great reason why. This one point alone will demolish any
such theory that this Rich man is actually and literally having his flesh burned by real

Let us now see if Jesus gives us any indication whether or not this Rich man will
ever come out of this place of torments and what these torments really are:

The Greek word translated "torments" in Vs. 23 is basanos.

From Friberg‘s Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, we are told
that basanois which is a form of the noun basanos, means, "strictly, a
touchstone for testing the genuineness of metals by rubbing against it..."

In secular Greek literature this word (basanois) was used figuratively to extract
information from a person by torture or punishment.

From the Greek-English Keyword Concordance we read this, torment, literally a

touchstone, used to test metals for alloys, [and] then the examination of
persons by torture (Page 307).

Though the Rich man may, indeed, be suffering discomfort or pain, it is not
from fire burning his flesh, but rather from being tested and proved
through chastisement. .

It is an interesting fact of Scripture that except for Paul "punishing" the church,
there is only ONE SCRIPTURE in the whole new testament that uses the
word "punishment." All others use the word "chastisement" which always
carries the connotation of correction and bringing things back to what is right
again. Chastisement by its very definition CANNOT be eternal. There
is always a purpose and goal in mind with the use of the word

In Vs. 24 and 25 we will likewise see that the word translated "tormented" does
by no means carry a meaning of being physical pained or physically tortured.

"...he is seeing Abraham from afar..."

Impossible. The man is enveloped in "flames" and can clearly identify two
personalities from "afar" across a great chasm? Not with human eyes.

"And he shouting, said..."

Impossible. Proof: Psalm 31:17--"...let the wicked be ashamed, and let them
be silent in the grave [Heb. SHEOL]. There it is! There is no talking and no shouting
in sheol. If anyone can literally "shout" in hades or sheol they make God a liar.

"...send Lazarus that he should be dipping the tip of his finger in

water and cooling my tongue..."

Impossible. If someone were in a literal fire they would not be asking for a drop of
water for their tongue. Their skin and eyes would be in much greater pain than their
tongue! The tongue is at least somewhat protected in the mouth cavity. Now if
anyone DARE as to debate me on this issue, let them jump into a fire and see for
themselves which burns most--the eyes and skin or the tongue? Besides a drop on
the tip of one‘s finger would be less than useless. It would have no effect. None. It's
a parable. This language is figurative.

"...I am tormented [pained] in this flame."

Impossible. Yes, it is possible to be "tormented [pained] in flame," however, it is

impossible to calmly talk about it while it is happening! If his body were human so as
to have a nervous system and feel pain, then of necessity that same body would
burn up. It is the destruction of the skin cells that is causing the pain. Within seconds
the skin no longer pains (it‘s dead). Now it is the deeper flesh that pains. But by then
the man would pass out and soon die. These are things that people completely
unversed in the Scriptures understand. It is not literal fire that is causing him this pain
or torment.

What kind of "torment" is God talking about in this parable? Is this physical pain
from the flames burning his flesh as is taught in Christendom? Not at all! Note
that he does not say "flames," but rather "flame," singular! The Greek word
translated "tormented" in verses 24 and 25 is a totally different Greek word than
is used for "torments" in verse 23. The Greek word here isodunao and it
means to be sorrowful or pained, but not physically, but rather
EMOTIONALLY! We can easily see how the Holy Spirit of God used this word in
Scripture. Adunao is used only two other times in all Scripture and both times it
has absolutely nothing to do with physical torture, but rather with emotional sorrow or

1. "And when they saw Him, they were amazed: and His
mother said unto Him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us?
Behold, thy father and I have sought
thee SORROWING [Greek: adunao, same word translated "tormented"
in Luke 16:24 & 25]" (Luke 2:48).

2. "Sorrowing [Greek: adunao, same word translated "tormented"

in Luke 16:24 & 25], most of all for the words which he spoke,
that they should see his face no more. And they accompanied
him into the ship" (Acts 20:38).

Now then, does anyone believe that they were physically tortured when Paul
departed? Does anyone believe the parents of Jesus were physical tortured in their
flesh while they searched for Jesus? King James has lied lots of times with
translation of words.

Had the KJV translators been consistent they should have translated Luke
16:24 & 25 the same way. He was emotionally "pained" or "sorrowed" and
not physically tormented or tortured! The same word cannot mean
both "emotionally sorrowed" and "physically tortured." IMPOSSIBLE!!

The Rich man was emotionally pained or sorrowed by the flame (the testing
and trials), not tortured, and that‘s why, as we shall see later, he wanted a drop
[a symbolic drop of water] for his tongue and not a barrel of water to cool his body.
Let‘s not be guilty of adding to the Rich man‘s woes.

"Now Abraham said, Child, be reminded that you got your good thing
in your life, and Lazarus likewise evil things."

If this Rich man is really being pictured literally in a hellhole of eternal torture,
why then didn‘t Abraham say to him something like this: "Scoundrel, be reminded
that you were a liar, cheat, robber, blasphemer, drunkard, murderer, ungodly,
unholy, unrepentant, incorrigible, piece of slime in your life, so burn in Hell
forever." But no, the Rich man is accused of no such things.

Most governments do not sentence people to cruel and unusual punishment for
minor crimes. Christian theologians would sentence this Rich man to all eternity in
Hell fire and I don‘t see where according to what this parable "literally says" he did
anything bad. He lived a life of "good things!" In the literal language of this parable
no sin is attributed to him. Not ONE! The rich man got good things, and for that we
are told he will have his flesh barbecued with real fire in an eternal hellhole of insane
torture? Lazarus got evil things, and for that we are told he will spend eternity in
Heaven? Is anyone in this parable said to be literally good or bad?


By all appearances and By all appearances and descriptions,

descriptions, the Rich man was an Lazarus was poor, diseased, probably
educated, well-dressed, well- uneducated, poorly dressed, poorly
groomed and well-mannered groomed, hungry, a homeless person in
person who gave food to the poor, the streets.
fed the stray dogs, had a merry
heart and cheerful disposition, and
loved his family.

We know that God blessed him, He was obviously not blessed of God.
because he "received GOOD" And According to TBN this man just didn't have
Jas. 1:17 says, "Every good gift ... faith to be healed. And wasn't blessed
comes down from the Father." because he didn't obey God. He wasn't
very thankful. He never did say: "Oh, by
the way, Mr. Rich man, Thank you for all
the food you always gave me," Did he?

And notice carefully what this It doesn't say Lazarus was good, kind,
parable does not say: faithful, righteous, or loved God.

It doesn't say that he was an evil In fact, it really doesn‘t say one,
man, ever hurt anyone, stole, single, positive, anything about him what--
murdered, cursed God, didn't so--ever!
believe in God, or ever did anything
bad. It says nothing negative about
the Rich man.

So we are to take this parable literally? As an historical fact? Okay then, what does it
"literally" say? Not what we might think it means but what it actually SAYS:

1. If one is healthy, happy, prosperous, gives to the poor, is respectful of

authority, loves his family, is concerned for the welfare of others and is
enormously blessed of God, and has a life of "good" things, he will go to
Hades and be tormented in flames of fire without water and without mercy.

2. If one is poor, diseased, homeless, a beggar, shows no thanks for even

the little he does receive, has not the faith to be healed, and is not blessed of
God, but only has a life of evil things, he will go to Abraham‘s bosom where
he is consoled and comforted in his distress [Gk: parakaleo].
Quite frankly neither one is a pretty picture. That‘s because this is figurative and
symbolic language, so of course it doesn‘t make sense literally! It‘s a parable.

Here then is the bottom line of the Christian interpretation of this parable:
Live a life of good things now, blessed of God, and you‘ll burn in the flames of
Hell forever.
Live a life of evil things now, cursed of God, and you‘ll live forever in Heaven.

Doesn‘t make much sense when we look at it literally, does it? You know, if this
parable is literal, Abraham is on the wrong side! Abraham possessed many more of
the qualities of the rich man than he did of Lazarus (not actually, but if we take this
parable literally)! Abraham was very rich, loved his family, was concerned for the
welfare of others, provided for his servants, was respectful of authority (especially of
God), was tremendously blessed of God and had a life of many good things.
According to the majority of Christendom‘s interpretation of this story, Abraham
should be in Hell!

Actually Abraham is in hades (sheol), as are all the "fathers." And all the dead
ungodly people are there as well. They don‘t know it, however. It‘s very quiet in
hades, no thoughts, no praise, no anything--it‘s "imperceptible" and "unseen."
Back to the parable:

"Yet now here he is being consoled, yet you are in pain [adunaoI]."

Lazarus is "consoled." This word in Greek is used in conjunction with someone

who is "in distress." So Lazarus is being "consoled in his distress." Doesn‘t sound
like much of a Heaven to me, And the rich man is "in pain." Why? It doesn‘t say he
did anything wrong, or evil, so why is he in pain? Who judged him? When? For


There is only one man who Scripturally fits all the descriptions of the "rich man" in
this parable. Only one person who "personifies" all of the symbols and identifying
clues given of this rich man. And that man is:


But not just Judah as an historical individual, but collectively. All Israel under the
headship of Judah, the Jews. And the Jews were "rich."

Beginning back in Gen. 15:14 God prophesied that Abraham‘s descendants were
to be very rich. "And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and
afterward shall they come out with great substance."

"Therefore the Lord established the kingdom in his hand and all
Judah brought to Jehoshaphat presents; and he had riches and
honour in abundance" (II Chron. 17:5).
"...and he built in Judah castles, and cities of store" (Vs. 12).

Jerusalem had a standing army of 860,000 men! (II Chron. 17:13-18). And that
didn‘t even include the fortified cities in Judah. (Vs. 19).

Hezekiah (King of Judah): "...had exceeding much riches and honour; and
he made himself treasures for silver, and for gold, and for precious
stones...all manner of pleasant jewels; storehouses also for the
increase of corn, and wine, and oil, and stalls for all manner of
beasts ... he provided him cities, possessions of flocks and herds in
abundance; for God had given him substance very much".
(II Ch 32:27-29).

So yes, Judah was rich. And who to this day are universally known for having money
and being successful in the financial world? The Jews. However, these were just
some of Judah‘s material possessions. Judah was rich in another way--very rich.
Judah possessed something far more valuable than all of these possessions.

God bestowed on Judah a treasure greater than any other on the

face of the earth, in the history of the world.
"What, then is the prerogative of the Jew, or what the benefit of
circumcision? Much in every manner... For first, indeed, that they
were entrusted with the ORACLES of God" (Rom. 3:1-2).

Prerogative is translated from [Gk. perisson‘ EXCESS, SUPERABUNDANTLY]

Who has a diamond collection, an art collection, a string of corporations, or fifty
Swiss Bank accounts that could begin to approach the value of the oracles of God?

"For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them,
as the Lord our God is in all things..."(Deu. 4:7).

"He sheweth His WORD unto Jacob, his statutes and His judgment
unto Israel" (Psa. 147:19).

"Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship:

for SALVATION is of the Jews" (Jn 4:22).

So not only was Judah rich materially, but God bestowed on Judah His
very word and through Judah the very salvation of the world. Who but Judah
possessed such wealth?

"...and he dressed in purple..."

Imagine Christ asking His disciples: "Oh, by the way, would you fellows be interested
in knowing what color clothing this Rich man was wearing just before he went to
Hell?" Ridiculous nonsense!

But what is nonsense in the literal is the symbolic sign of this man‘s real identity!
Purple is: "A color used in garments of a bluish red, by a dye obtained from a shell
fish, purpura. It denotes rank of royalty" (Greek-English Keyword Concordance p.

Purple was worn by Kings (Judges 8:26). Even the Caesars of Rome wore Purple
as a symbol of their royalty.

And who was to carry the royal line in Israel...? JUDAH.

"The scepter [a symbol of rulership and power] shall not depart from
Judah, now a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh
come..." (Gen. 49:10).

David was of the Tribe of Judah and was anointed King of Judah. Our Lord was of
the line of Judah (Mat. 1:2), and will be not only King of Judah, but King of Kings
over all the world.

During our Lord‘s ministry, Judea was under Roman rule, however, there were still
rulers in Judea--The Jews. There were Scribes, Pharisees, and Priests. Jesus said
they had power and authority from God.

"The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses‘ seat: all therefore
whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do..."
(Mat. 23:2-3).

God has always elevated Judah above the other Tribes.

In I Chron. 2:1-3 we read:

"These are the sons of Israel; Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah,
Issachar, and Zebulun, Dan, Joseph, and Benjamin, Naphtali, Gad,
and Asher. The sons of Judah;..."

Notice Judah was the third born to Israel [JACOB] and is listed third, but
when God gives their children‘s names He starts first with Judah.
To show Judah‘s dominance in Rulership, when the Tribes of Israel are
enumerated in Revelation 7:4, Judah is put first at the head of the list. He
was not, however, the firstborn!

"...and cambric (fine linen) …"

The Rich man didn‘t just dress in "Purple," but "Purple and Cambric." He
wore both. Cambric or Fine Linen is symbolic of the clothing that the priests
wore (Ex. 28:5, 25:4).
And of the interior decorations of the Tabernacle itself (Ex. 26:1).

Our Lord would not have told us that the Rich man wore these two specific types of
garments except that they have great symbolic value in identifying who this man
personifies. But if "Purple" symbolizes "Royalty" and "Fine
Linen" symbolizes "Priesthood," how can the same man wear both? Only our
Lord is both, King and Priest.

Remember, the Levites and the priests were loyal to Judah through their long

When they got the opportunity, they went with Ezra and Nehemiah back to
Jerusalem--back to Judah. They were part of Judah. They were called Jews. Only
one, had both the Scepter and the Priesthood: JUDAH.

Notice this Scripture carefully:

"Then rose up the chief of the fathers of Judah and Benjamin, and
the priests, and the Levites ... God had raised, to go up to build the
house of the Lord which is in Jerusalem." (Ezra 1:3).

There it is! JUDAH had both the ROYALTY and the PRIESTHOOD. And all
these leaders of Judah, BENJAMIN, and LEVI, became who were known in
Christ‘s time as "the Jews." And that‘s why, although the Apostle Paul was of the
Tribe of Benjamin, nonetheless, he said of himself, that he was "a Jew." Yes he

In JUDAH were both the Royal Scepter (purple) and the Priesthood (fine
linen). And that‘s the reason Christ took the time to tell us what the Rich man was
wearing! And no other personality in Scripture has both these designations along
with all the other identifying features attributed to the Rich man!

Father Abraham "...Child, be reminded..."

Judah could therefore legitimately call Abraham, "Father." Abraham was Judah‘s
Great Grandfather. Abraham could legitimately call the Rich man, "Child." Judah
was Abraham‘s Great Grandchild.

"They have Moses and the Prophets..."

The Kingdom of Judah did have "Moses and the Prophets." They were the
protectors and scribes of those very documents till the time of our Lord‘s ministry,
when Jesus said that they "sit in Moses‘ seat." Judah was the very depository for
The Law (Moses), The Prophets, and the Writings. Remember the Oracles
were given to the Jews (Rom. 3:1-2).
The Rich man said: "I have five brothers..."

There‘s a rule of Scripture study that is very sound, and I believe is applicable here.
It goes like this: "Literal where and when possible." Most of this parable
cannot be taken literally. Why? Because for one, it often contradicts the laws of
science and physics. And two, it would contradict hundreds of other plain verses of
Scripture. It‘s the "parable" that cannot be taken literally. That does not
mean that certain facts contained "in" the parable are not "literal." Abraham is,
undoubtedly, "literally" Abraham. Moses and the prophets are,
undoubtedly, "literally" Moses and the prophets. They obviously represent
themselves, not someone else.

With that in mind, who was it who had literally five brothers? Not that these "five
brothers" cannot represent something else in the Scriptures. For example, there
were five spheres where there were "Jews" who heard Christ proclaimed after His

1. Jerusalem
2. Judea
3. Samaria
4. The "limits of the land"
5. Those Jews dispersed "among the nations."

At first glance, you might think Judah can‘t be this "Rich man." Didn‘t Judah have
eleven brothers? Yes and No. True, there were twelve sons of Israel, one of
which was Judah, but not all by the same mother.

Judah‘s Mother, Leah, had

1. Reuben
2. Simeon
3. Levi
4. Issachar
5. Zebulun
6. Judah makes six (Gen. 29:31-35, 30:18-19).

So who had five brothers? JUDAH.

That Judah (the Jews), is here personified in this Rich man, there can be little

But who then is this "Lazarus?"


The answer is not far to find when we see where he is: "in Abraham‘s bosom." Being
in someone‘s bosom shows a very close emotional relationship and position of
honor. Christ likens Himself as being in the "bosom" of His Father (Jn 1:18). And
John, likewise, who was very fond of Jesus leaned back into Jesus‘ bosom (Jn
13:23). To be in the bosom of Abraham, or the bosom of Christ, or
the bosom of the Father, are certainly positions of great honor.

The Jews coveted that relationship with Abraham. They were so proud of their
Father Abraham. They knew that God thought highly of their Father Abraham, and
they wanted to be connected to that lofty position themselves. However, they did not
come even close to qualifying for such an honor. They loved to say: "We have
Abraham for our father!" But as Christ told them, they didn‘t do the works of
faith that their Father Abraham did.

So Judah is not in the bosom of Abraham, but Lazarus is. Why? Who
is this "Lazarus" that he should have such a lofty position of honor with the Father
of the faithful?

I said earlier that the Jews, undoubtedly, understood who Christ was referring to in
both the Rich man and Lazarus. Remember that the Jews of Jerusalem knew
Hebrew. Their scriptures were written in Hebrew. And they were a lot closer to these
symbols and the Hebrew language than we are today.

"And Abram said, Lord God, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go
childless, and the steward of my house is this ELIEZER of
Damascus? And Abram said "Behold, to me thou hast given no seed;
and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir." (Gen. 15:2-3).

In chapter 13 God had already promised great land and possessions to Abram‘s
seed. But Abram had no seed!

Abram told God that since he had no son, his chief steward, ELIEZER, would be his
heir and inherit all that was his.

ELIEZER was so faithful a steward to Abraham that he was planning to make him
his heir and give Eliezer all his possessions and inheritance. ELIEZER would have
been wealthy. He would have inherited the "promised land." He would have
received the "oracles of God" Ah, but no, God had different plans, it wasn‘t
the will of GOD. Abraham would have a son Isaac who would continue the
Abrahamic line.

It appears that ELIEZER will be left out. He lost his one big claim to fame. Now he‘s
just a Gentile from Damascus. All his generations will be Gentiles
(DOGS). ELIEZER knew he would inherit all of Abraham‘s possessions one day.
And now, that‘s all gone. But he remains faithful.

ELIEZER had ample opportunity to do away with Isaac on any number of

occasions, but he remained faithful to Abraham. He even took a journey to get a wife
for Isaac. Every step of faith and obedience that ELIEZER took removed him just
that much further from the inheritance he always thought would be his. He did all that
a faithful steward should do. But every step of faithful obedience to Abraham caused
his inheritance to slip further away.

Imagine just how faithful and trustworthy a steward would have to be for Abraham to
leave ALL his possessions to him. Abraham was extremely rich. Why look for
"another" to pass these blessings onto? ELIEZER has already proved himself
faithful. Abraham had already concluded that ELIEZER was the only logical heir:

"This ELIEZER of Demascus ... born in my house IS MINE HEIR"

(Gen. 15:2-3).

It appears that either ELIEZER becomes Abraham‘s heir, or he receives nothing.

Absolutely no spiritual promises or possessions were ever made by God

to ELIEZER. If he is not to get Abraham‘s inheritance, which included all that
Abraham already had plus all that God is about to bless him with on top of all his
other possessions, then ELIEZER is going to be poor as far as spiritual
blessings are concerned. As a Gentile, all he can ever hope for are the
spiritual "crumbs" that fall from the Rich man‘s table. Not to fear: Through faith
God works many miracles.


"Now the woman was a Greek, a native of Syro-Phoenicia [A Gentile],

and she asked Him that He should be casting the demon out of her
daughter. Yet Jesus said to her, ‗Let first the children [The Jews] be
satisfied, for it is not ideal to take the children‘s bread and cast it to
the dogs.‘ Yet she answered and is saying to Him, ‗Yes, Lord, For
the dogs also, underneath the table, are eating the scraps from the
little children.‘ And He said to her, ‗Because of this saying, go. The
demon has come out of your daughter.‘" (Mk. 6:27-29).

So clearly this Syro-Phoenician woman was not asking for a small portion of food
(crumbs or scraps), but rather a small portion of Christ‘s spiritual
blessing. And clearly, Lazarus does not represent a street beggar in need of a
small portion of food. He personifies something much greater than one single beggar
in the street.
When Christ entered Capernaum a centurion [a Roman, a Gentile] asked Christ to
heal his boy. Christ said He would come. The Centurion said He need only to "say
the word" and he would trust Christ for the healing!

"When Jesus heard it, He marveled, and said to them that followed,
‗Verily I say unto you I have not found so GREAT FAITH no, NOT IN
ISRAEL‘" (Mat. 8:5-10).

Why then, are the Gentiles relegated to "dogs?" Not in all Israel did our Lord find
such faith as in these GENTILE "DOGS!" But "Judah" gets all the blessings while
the "Gentile" dogs get the crumbs? Ah, just when we think things are going bad
and God isn‘t fair, He shows us His strange and marvelous wisdom!

" What was Christ‘s response to this marvelous exhibition of faith by the Centurion?

"And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and the
west [Gentiles], and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and
Jacob, in the Kingdom of Heaven, but the children of the
kingdom [Judah--the Jews] shall be cast into outer darkness: there
shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Mat. 8:11-12).

We can still see the rich man in this context…amazing.

Christ is NOT telling us that "Jews" from the East and "Jews" from the West will
sit down with Abraham, but that the "Jews" shall be cast out." That‘s

It‘s the "Jews" who are the "CHILDREN OF THE KINGDOM" who are "cast
out." And those from the East and West are "GENTILES." Christ is telling us who
these "many" are because He is commenting on the faith that God has given to this
Centurion GENTILE.


Christ rarely spoke of the Gentiles in His ministry. But He did speak of them. And,
although, He said He was sent only to the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel, in His
human ministry, He nonetheless, was making provisions for the Gentiles, as in this
prophetic statement.
As Christ‘s disciples were to be like "SALT" to the earth, this Syro-Phoenician
woman, Cornelius of the Italian squadron, the Roman Centurion, the Samaritan
woman at the well, and others were certainly like "SALT" among the Jews.
The very first sermon of Christ‘s ministry foretold the calling of the Gentiles,
and it nearly cost Christ His life, let‘s read:
(Luke 4:14-30)NIV
―.......................18The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery
of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed,..................

27 And there were many in Israel with leprosyf in the time of Elisha
the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed—only Naaman the
28 All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard
29 They got up, drove him out of the town, and took him to the
brow of the hill on which the town was built, in order to throw him
down the cliff.
30 But he walked right through the crowd and went on his way.‖

When it comes to God‘s blessings, faith is thicker than blood.

God has not "CAST OFF" the GENTILES!

So we find "Lazarus" [Gk: helpless] begging scraps from a rich man‘s table.
Can "helpless" find "help?" Will God have mercy on him just as He did the Syro-
Phoenician woman and the Centurion? Yes!
"LAZARUS" IS "ELIEZER"!! Isn‘t this wonderful?
The Greek "Lazarus" is from Lazaros [Heb. HELPLESS].

But in
Hebrew "Lazarus" is Elazar or "Eliezer" from el [God] and azar [HELP]!
If Lazarus knew his Hebrew name, he would have known that help was on the way.
The "God of Help" had already planned this whole marvelous drama from the time
of Abraham.

Just as the Jews can look to their ancient "father" Abraham as a sterling example
of faith in God, so now, likewise, can the Gentiles Look to Abraham‘s
Steward, Eliezer as a "father" of rare faith. Truly there is no partiality with God--it
only appears that way when we let the RELATIVE get in the way of

It is the Gentiles that God is primarily dealing with today! Paul says there is to be
only a "remnant" of Jews. His calling was to the nations. However, Paul knew that
God was still calling a "few" of the Jews.
"If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my
flesh [Jews], and might save some of them"(Rom. 11:14).
For nearly two thousand years now, God is calling primarily the Gentiles..


Lazarus [Eliezer] was: "...cast at his [Rich man‘s] gate [portal]..."

It was the "Gentiles" who were NOT ALLOWED into the Royal and Priestly
House of Judah. They could go no further than "The court of the
Gentiles." Any blessings they received had to come to them from inside where
they were never allowed to go! Though designated as "proselytes [new
converts]," they were, nonetheless, like "dogs" who only got
the "crumbs" or scraps! Hence we find Lazarus cast "at the gate."

Little could these Jews hearing this parable realize that in just a few short years all
this would change.

"Yet now, in Christ Jesus, you [Gentiles], who once are far off, are
become near by the blood of Christ. For He is our Peace, Who makes
both one, and razes the central wall of the barrier [middle wall of
partition] ... He brings the evangel of peace to you [Gentiles] ... for
through Him we both [Jews and Gentiles] have had the access, in one
spirit to the Father" (Eph. 2:13-18).

And so today, the Gentiles don‘t have to stand outside the gate, or be
separated by a barrier, or stay in their own court, and wait for handouts. They
have direct access to God. Can someone shout amen to this!

And who has been preaching the Evangel for the past two thousand years? The
Jews? Hardly. It has been the Gentiles that have translated the Scriptures into
nearly every language on earth. It is those called of the Gentiles that are
accepting Christ Jesus as their Savior, not the Jews. It is really a rare thing to
find Jews accepting Christ as the Messiah. And that‘s why we find
Lazarus [ELIEZER--THE GENTILES] in the bosom of Abraham, and
the Rich man [THE JEWS] engulfed in flame of Anti-Semitism for the
past two thousand years.

"...having ulcers [full of sores]..."

Lazarus is not full of sores in Abraham‘s bosom. He has been healed. In fact, that‘s
what "salvation" meant in New Testament times. "Salvation" is a beautiful
sounding Latin word; however, it was never part of the New Testament Greek-
Vocabulary. Not until six or eight centuries ago did the word "salvation" come into
translations. Before that time it was "HEALTH" that was one‘s salvation. And all of
the very oldest Anglo-Saxon Scriptures translate
it "HEALTH" not "salvation." So for Lazarus "HEALTH" in the bosom of
Abraham was SALVATION!

Lazarus doesn‘t represent materialistically poor Jews, but spiritually poor

Gentiles. That‘s the whole point here in the parable. Judah was rich and knew
it! They were like the Laodiceans who said:
"I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and
knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and
blind, and naked" (Rev. 3:17).

"...Father Abraham, be merciful to me, and send Lazarus that he

should be dipping the tip of his finger in water..."

In figurative and symbolic language the Rich man asks for a drop of water on the tip
of Lazarus‘ finger. How appropriate! Who was it that refused to help the "poor" with
so much as their little finger?

"For they [Judah] bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and
lay them on men‘s shoulders; but they themselves will not move
them with one of their FINGERS" (Mat. 23:4).

"...and spake unto Rehoboam [King of Judah], saying, ... make thou the
grievous service of thy father, and his heavy yoke which he put upon
us, lighter, and we will serve thee. But he forsook the counsel of the
old men ... My little FINGER shall be thicker than my father‘s loins ...
my father hath chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you
with scorpions" (I Kg. 12:7:11).

Now Judah begs the assistance of a FINGER from a poor man! And not just
a poor man, but a poor Gentile! It was custom for pious Jews to cut a
section of their garment off if it were so much as touched by the FINGER of
a Gentile. Now the rich and lofty personification of God‘s chosen people begs
for the assistance of a Gentile FINGER. These are deep secrets unfolding,
you won‘t hear this from the pulpit.

"God is not to be sneered at, for whatsoever a man may be sowing,

this shall he be reaping also" (Gal. 67).

"...and cooling my tongue..."

It isn‘t his flesh that he wants cooled from this flame, but his tongue. This man is
frightened. When people are petrified from fear their tongue dries and swells. That‘s
why some inexperienced speakers often need a whole glass of water just to get
through a 10 minute speech. (this is my own thinking not scriptural though but a
Well, God brought Judah back from Babylon to Jerusalem, but Judah didn‘t have the
same heart as King David. He failed to remember. David said:

"...let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth ... if I forget to

remember Jerusalem."

It was because of Judah‘s "tongue" that Jerusalem was destroyed in the first

"For Jerusalem is ruined, and Judah is fallen; because their

TONGUE and their doings are against the Lord..."(Isa. 3:8).

So in the parable we find Lazarus (Eliezer--a Gentile) in the bosom of Abraham,

and Judah, who should be there, on the other side asking for mercy. But Lazarus
can‘t come over to the Rich man even if he wanted to, because of this "chasm."

"And in all this, between us and you a great chasm [gulf] has been


"And in the unseen [hades], lifting up his eyes, existing in


Judah [the Jews] proved to be totally unworthy of their high calling. Their heart‘s
turned from the declarations of God. Claiming Abraham as their father did not
exonerate them either.

"‗Our father is Abraham.‘ Jesus answered them, ‗If you are children
of Abraham, did you ever do the works of Abraham? Yet now you are
seeking to kill me, a Man Who has spoken to you the truth..."
(John 8:39-20)!

Not only were they no longer "...of the faith of Abraham," but they had, in fact,
utterly corrupted themselves. After King David, Solomon broke God‘s
commandments and covenant (I Kg 11:11).

King Rehoboam said:

"And now whereas my father did lade you with a heavy yoke, I will
add to your yoke; my father hath chastised you with whips, but I will
chastise you with scorpions" (I Kg. 12:10-11).

"...Judah kept not the commandments of the Lord..." (II Kg. 19:17).
And King Manasseh, of Judah, went from bad to worse:

"...he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord after the
abominations of the heathen ... he built up again the high places
which Hezekiah his father had destroyed ... he built altars in the
house of the Lord ... he built altars for all the host of heaven in the
two courts of the house of the Lord. And he made his sons pass
through the fire, and observed times, and used enchantments, and
dealeth with familiar spirits and wizards; he wrought much
wickedness ... Manasseh seduced them to do more evil than did the
nations whom the Lord destroyed..." (II Kg. 21:2-9).

"Judah hath dealt treacherously, and an abomination is committed

in Israel and in Jerusalem; for Judah has profaned the holiness of
the Lord which He loved, and hath married the daughter of a strange
god." (Mal. 2:11).


According to a "literal" teaching of this parable, the Rich man did nothing to
deserve his torment.

But once we identify this Rich man, however, we find a mountain of sins and evils
that are attributed to him:
When John the baptist saw these same descendants of the Jews, the Pharisees and
Sadducees coming to his baptisms, he remarked:"progeny [offspring] of vipers."
Our Lord used the most derogatory [offensive] language possible in describing the
Jews of the first century:

"O GENERATION OF VIPERS, how can ye, being EVIL, speak

good..." (Mat. 12:34)!

"And EVIL and ADULTEROUS GENERATION seeketh after a

sign..." (Mat. 12:39)!

"Why do ye also TRANSGRESS the commandment of God..."

(Mat. 15:3)!


"...John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed

him not..." (Mat. 21:32)!

"Why tempt ye me, Ye HYPOCRITES?" (Mat. 22:17)!

"But all their works they do for to be seen of men..." (Mat. 23:5)!

"But woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, HYPOCRITES! (Vs. 13)!

" shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for ye neither go

in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in."
(Vs. 13)!

"...for ye DEVOUR widows‘ houses..." (Vs. 14).

"Woe unto you scribes and Pharisees, HYPOCRITES! for ye compass

sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make
him twofold more the child of GEHENNA (KJV=HELL) than
yourselves" (Vs. 15).

"Woe unto you, ye BLIND GUIDES..." (Vs. 16).

"Ye FOOLS and BLIND..." (Vs. 17).

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, HYPOCRITES! for ye pay tithe
of the mint and the anise and cummin, and have omitted the
weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith..." (Vs. 23).


gnat and swallow a camel. (Vs. 25)….KJV.

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, HYPOCRITES! ... whited

sepulchres ... full of dead men‘s bones, and of
all UNCLEANNESS" (Vs. 27).

"Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the

children of them which KILLED the prophets. Ye SERPENTS.
Ye GENERATION OF VIPERS..." (Vs. 22-23).

"I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes; and some of
them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in
your Synagogues, and persecute them from city to city; That upon
you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth..."
(Vs. 34-35).

God Will Help Us To Understand In Jesus Name.

Mis-translations and mis-interpretations


To find the vital key it is important to begin with the Old Testament, and not with the
New. To modern ears this may sound strange, but remember that the Old Testament
was written first, many centuries before the New. And since they both really form one
revelation from God, the New Testament writers knew the Old Testament very well
indeed. They quoted from it and they used its terms; and among the terms they used is
Satan. (The term "DEVIL" occurs rarely in the Old Testament and is used
differently there from the way it is used in the New.)

God makes one thing very clear in the Bible:

"I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me"
(Isaiah 46:9).

No superhuman power resists God's will. The devil of popular opinion does not exist. If
we want to know the source of evil, we have to look elsewhere.

The Bible leaves us in no doubt as to where the blame lies. Man is tempted from within
himself. Hear what Jesus, the Son of God, said:

"Those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart,
and they defile a man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts,
murders, adulteries, fornication, thefts, false witness, and
blasphemies" (Matt. 15:18, 19).

Jesus confirms what God had told Noah long ago:

"The imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth" (Genesis 8:21).

Jeremiah 17:9 says: "The heart is deceitful above all things, and
desperately wicked."

James agrees with all these sayings. He concludes:

"Each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and
enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin,
when it is full-grown, brings forth death"
(James 1:14, 15).

Notice that no mention is made in any of these passages of a supernatural devil.

We need to look no further than ourselves to see from where evil comes.
So we begin with Satan, the Old Testament term. What does the word "Satan" mean?
It is not hard to find out.

Take the case of Balaam who lived in the days when the children of Israel were
wandering in the wilderness. He was a prophet who had been told by God not to go on a
certain hired mission to curse the Israelites. But he wanted the money offered him as a
reward, so he went. Riding upon an ass, he soon found his way blocked by an angel:

"The angel of the Lord took his stand in the way as his adversary" (or
enemy) (Num. 22:22, RSV).


The word for "adversary" is Satan (from which we get our "Satan") and that is just
what it means. Notice two things: SATAN here is an ordinary word
meaning ADVERSARY or ENEMY, and not the name of a person. The word
occurs again only 10 verses later: the angel said to Balaam, "Behold, I am come
forth to withstand you" (Vs. 32), literally "to be an ADVERSARY to you".

This is the first time the word Satan appears in the Hebrew record. Notice that
this SATAN is a good angel, "An angel of the Lord", who is doing what God
wants, and not an evil one! If we look up in a Bible concordance the way the
word SATAN is used in the Old Testament, we shall find that it means

For example: "Why," cried David, "should you (Joab and his brothers)
be ADVERSARIES (SATANS) unto me?" (2 Samuel 19:22).

And so in half a dozen other cases, where the allusion is usually to men.

SATAN IN THE BOOK OF JOB The first few verses of chapter one describes Job
as living in the land of Uz, a God-fearing man who had many possessions.Then,

Vs. 6:
"Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present
themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them."

The phrase 'sons of God' occurs again in Job 38.

Job 38:7
when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted
for joy?

The 'sons of God' here are clearly angels and so it is reasonable to conclude that
the 'sons of God' in Job 1:6 is also referring to angels.
[Let scripture interpret itself. If we have a problem understanding a word or phrase, look
to see how it is used elsewhere in the same book. If it is not used again in the same
book, expand the search to the rest of scripture.]

Is 'Satan' the angel's name? Here the English translators have not really played fair
with us, for all the Hebrew says is "THE ADVERSARY".

The capital S in Satan is the translators' own invention. Hebrew makes no

distinction between capital letters and others. Even in the margin the Authorized and
Revised Version translators have printed "THE ADVERSARY", suggesting by their
capital A (for which they have no evidence) that this is that special Adversary, Satan. All
that the Hebrew justifies us in saying is "the adversary came among them".


9 Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for

12 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy
power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth
from the presence of the LORD.

The angel suggests that Job only serves God because he receives material benefits
from Him. This is a valid piece of reasoning. It is not in itself 'evil'. God says effectively,
go and bring trouble upon him but don't touch Job himself. The angel does what God
has given him the power to do. All power is of God and the angel cannot go beyond
what God allows. God knows the end from the beginning and so has control over what
the angel does.

Job understands that everything is under God's control so when the angel brings the evil
upon him, we read:

And said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I
return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed
be the name of the LORD.

The next time the sons of God come together, God says that He (God) is responsible for
what the angel did. This confirms that the evil done to Job was under God's control.

Job 2:3 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my
servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an
upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? and still he
holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him, to
destroy him without cause.

The angel now suggests that Job still holds fast to his integrity because God hasn't
allowed Job himself to be touched.
Again it is a valid piece of reasoning that is not in itself 'evil'.

5 But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and
he will curse thee to thy face.

6 And the LORD said unto SATAN, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save
his life.

Again it is clear that the angel is an adversary to Job and not to God, because God now
gives him permission to afflict Job, with the provision that Job is to be kept alive. Again
Job accepts that his suffering comes from God.

10 But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women
speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall
we not receive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips.

If Job 'did not sin with his lips' he must be speaking the truth. The evil that he suffered
was from the hand of God. The evil that he suffered was not 'sin' because the angel
obeyed God. Everything that God does with men, whether good or evil is done via his
angels who all obey Him perfectly.

Everything that was done to Job was by the hand of God. Far from opposing God, Job's
angelic adversary did the will of God.


With this valuable background understanding we now look at an example of the use of
"satan" in the New Testament. Peter had just made his great declaration of belief in
Jesus as the Son of the living God and Jesus had pronounced a blessing upon him as a
result. But Jesus then went on to speak of his own fate; he would have to go to
Jerusalem and there the leaders of the Jews would seize him and he would be killed, but
he would rise again the third day (Matthew 16:21). Peter could neither understand nor
accept this and began to rebuke Jesus: "God forbid, Lord! This shall never
happen to you." In other words, "You must not think of such a thing." But Jesus said
to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan: you are a hindrance to me."

Why was Peter a "SATAN"? Because he was being "an adversary" to Jesus; he
was trying to persuade the Lord not to do what he knew had to be done in his obedience
to the will of God. If Peter had had his way, Jesus would have rejected his Father's will
and his great sacrifice for sin upon the cross would never have taken place. So Jesus
had to tell this "adversary" (SATAN) to "get behind me". And then he adds a
comment which is most important for our understanding:

You are an adversary and a stumbling block to me, says Jesus in effect
to Peter, for your mind is not on the "things of God, but the things of
men" (Vs. 23, R.V.).

So this most important New Testament example teaches us some valuable lessons.
First, this "SATAN" was a man; second, he rejected the will of God; third, what marked
him out was that he desired to do the will of man instead -a most important clue, as we
shall see later.

Let us remind ourselves what we have learned so far: a "SATAN" is an adversary, and
nearly always an evil adversary. In the examples we have looked at, "SATAN" was:

 an angel of God, doing his will;

 a man posing as a worshipper of God;
 other men who were "adversaries";
 And now Peter, an apostle of the Lord, who was opposing the will of God.

With this general understanding of the meaning of "SATAN", we should find a lot of
Bible passages much clearer.

THE DEVIL This is a Greek term, not a Hebrew one, and so it is found only in the New
Testament. [The word "DEVILS" in "casting out devils" etc. is a different
word, which really means "DEMONS"]

Again we must try to discover what the term really means. We can easily do this, for
there are passages where the translators themselves have shown us. Writing to Timothy
the Apostle Paul says that

"in the last days there will come times of stress"; in these times "men
will be lovers of self, lovers of money . . .
SLANDERERS…" (2 Timothy 3:1-3).

The word translated "SLANDERERS" is the plural of the one usually

rendered "DEVIL" and is related to our English "diabolical".

Again, giving instructions on how believers are to behave as they meet to worship, he
comes to the women members:

"Women in like manner must be serious, no SLANDERERS, temperate,

faithful in all things" (1 Timothy 3:11).

Again the word is the one usually translated "DEVIL", though here it is plural. The
translators in these two passages have given us the basic sense of the word. Notice
once more: these "DEVILS" are people.

Particularly in the Old Testament, the word "SATAN" is often used for forces which
stand in the way of God: "SATAN" means 'ADVERSARY', but it is mostly left
untranslated. In the New Testament, the Greek word diabolos occurs 38 times; 35
times it is translated "DEVIL". Its original meaning was 'ONE WHO ACCUSES'.
In fact it is twice translated "FALSE ACCUSERS" and once
as "SLANDERERS", because in those passages, the translators of the Bible knew
that it would not have made sense to use the word "DEVIL".

In Titus 2:3, the advice given by Paul to older women was to be reverent in the way
they lived, "not slanderers" (diabolos). And in 1 Timothy 3:11, Christian wives
are told to be reverent, "not slanderers" (diabolos)

It would have been foolish for the translators to use the word "DEVIL" in either
passage. Older women and Christian wives are obviously not "THE DEVIL". You must
not picture a supernatural devil every time you read the word "DEVIL". That would be a
big mistake.

But the great test passage for understanding "THE DEVIL" in the New Testament is in
Hebrews chapter 2. As we read the early verses of this chapter, it is clear that the
Apostle is writing about Jesus and his followers; and he calls the followers ―Children‖.
Now, in Vs. 14, he comes to his great statement about "THE DEVIL". We set it out
here in full first, and then we shall go over it, phrase by phrase, to make sure of
understanding it:

"Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself

likewise partook of the same nature; that through death he might
destroy him who has the power of death, that is, the DEVIL . . ."

The first phrase says quite clearly that the followers of Jesus are
"flesh and blood" -mortal beings! That is, they are ordinary men and women.


The second says that Jesus shared the same nature, "flesh and blood". The apostle
must have been very anxious indeed that his readers should clearly understand that the
nature of Jesus really was the same as that of his followers -- human nature -- for he
emphasizes the point: "he himself likewise took part of the same". There was
no need for the apostle to write in this emphatic way unless he had felt that it was
particularly important for his readers to understand this vital truth: that Jesus was a man,
in every respect.

The third sentence contains three declarations:

1. That Jesus destroyed the devil;

2. That he did it "through death", and that can only mean through
his own death, by dying himself; and

3. That the DEVIL has "the power of death".

Before we go any further, we must clear up one cause of misunderstanding. The English
reader, seeing a phrase like "him who has the power of death", is naturally led to
assume that the devil must be a person, or a being. But this is not necessarily so.

In English we have a very simple system of arranging gender: all male persons are
masculine, and are referred to as "he"; all female ones are feminine, and are referred to
as "she"; all other things are neuter and are referred to as "it". And at times we refer
to things as if they were persons: a ship as "she" for example. This is called

Greek, however (in which the New Testament was written), is different. It has three
genders, but they are used in another way. Males are "he", of course, and
females "she"; but other things may be any one of the three genders, masculine,
feminine, or neuter.

Now the Greek word for devil is masculine, and so the pronoun standing for it is "he".
But this does not make clear whether the DEVIL is a person or is not. The Greek is
quite neutral. If we wish to prove that the devil is, or is not, a person, we must get our
evidence from somewhere else, not from this expression.


We look now at our "three declarations" in this verse.

Jesus destroyed the DEVIL. So the DEVIL is "dead", or at the very least will be
destroyed by the time the work of Jesus is finished. But there are two remarkable points
about this statement in Hebrews 2:14. The apostle distinctly says that in order to
destroy the DEVIL, Jesus partook of human nature. Now is not this an astonishing

If Jesus' purpose was to destroy a powerful enemy, would he not have done far better to
have had a strong, immortal nature like the angels? What was he doing sharing the
weak nature of flesh and blood? Obviously there is a mystery here that needs

But that is not all. The apostle distinctly says that the way Jesus destroyed
the DEVIL was "through death". Now this can only mean through his own
death. What an extraordinary way to get rid of a powerful enemy, by dying to self!

From these two points, that in order to put an end to the DEVIL Jesus first shared
weak human nature and then had to die himself, it is clear that "THE DEVIL" of the
Bible must be something quite different from the idea of the devil usually held.

When you come across a Bible passage difficult to understand, it always helps to find
another one saying much the same thing, though in different terms. The two passages
will throw light on one another. Now there is such a passage to help us in this case. The
same apostle in the same letter, in Hebrews. 9, He refers to his first coming (which led
to his death on the cross) like this:
"But (Jesus) . . . has appeared once for all at the end of the age to put
away sin by the sacrifice of himself" (Vs. 26).

We notice at once that one of the things said here is the same as in
Hebrews 2:14.

"By the sacrifice of himself" Clearly means the same as "through his
own death". So probably the other terms mean the same thing. Let us set them out
side by side:

Hebrews 2:14 Hebrews 9:26

by the sacrifice of
through (his own death)
he might destroy the devil = put away sin

From this valuable parallel comment we learn that "destroying the DEVIL" is the
same as "putting away SIN". The DEVIL, then, must be a way of referring to that
human rebellion against God which the Bible calls sin.


We now have a valuable way of testing this understanding, for Hebrews 2:14
declares that the DEVIL "has the power of death". Now what in the Bible is said
to have this power? The Apostle Paul gives us the answer in two very helpful passages
in the Letter to the
Romans 5: 21 -- "As sin reigned in death . . . so through Jesus grace
will reign unto eternal life."

Here sin is regarded as a king who is ruling over his subjects; and the effect of his power
over them is death. Again in

Romans 6:23 -- "For the wages of sin is death . . . but the free gift of
God is eternal life."

Here sin is a master who pays his servants wages; he rewards them for service to
himself -- with death.

Both these passages are examples of personification: that is, something is spoken
of as if it were a person when in fact it is not. In both of them sin is personified; and in
both clearly it is sin that "has the power of death".

And so the Bible is telling us that the real DEVIL is sin. We are all aware
that the Bible is rich in using picture language, and for that matter it talks about
the DEVIL as if it had a real personality.
Let's have a look at the following scriptures so we could judge for ourselves.

In the story of Cain and Abel, blood is given a personality. Speaking to Cain, God said:

"What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood cries out to me
from the ground" (Genesis 4:10).

It happens again with wisdom, which is spoken of as a woman:

"Happy is the man who finds wisdom … he is more precious than

rubies; and all the things you may desire cannot compare with
her" (Proverbs 3:13-15).


Matthew 6:24, Jesus himself speaks of money ("mammon") as being a

master. This should not surprise us. We often talk like that ourselves. We say, "Fire
is a good servant, but a bad master". We don't really believe that fire is a man.

In the same way, evil and sin are sometimes given a personality. This helps us realize
just how big sin is, and how dangerous sins are to our salvation. This is proved by
comparing two Bible passages. Listen to the "picture language" used in
Hebrews 2:14: "… that through death he (Jesus) might destroy him who
had the power of death, that is, the DEVIL."

What is this DEVIL? What has the "power of death"?

Romans 6:23
tells us: "For the wages of sin is death."

Sin is powerful and brings "death". Your life is a constant battle

against sin. Sin is your real enemy, not a supernatural DEVIL.

Jesus said in John 6:70: "Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you
is a DEVIL?" But Judas was a man, not "a DEVIL". If the translators had said,
"One of you is a SLANDERER", the meaning would have been very clear. Judas
later betrayed Jesus with a kiss. He was a false friend indeed, but he was not a
supernatural DEVIL.

We need to look carefully at the Scriptures to understand who or what is the DEVIL.
Think about Rev. 2:10, where believers at Smyrna were told: "The DEVIL is about
to throw some of you into prison."

Does it make sense to you that a supernatural DEVIL literally put believers into prison?
It cannot be so, because we know the Romans did that. It is an example of evil at work.
Time and again we see the word "DEVIL" used to symbolize evil.

Sin is at work because men do not follow the ways of God. The terms "DEVIL",
"SATAN" AND "DEMONS" do not refer to immortal tempters in their original
meanings. There is no such being as a supernatural tempter.


We break off our consideration for a moment to ask a very important question: What
does the Bible say is the great enemy of God? Is it some fallen angel? Is it some
mysterious spirit being trying to undo God's work in the earth? Not at all. From the
first page of the Bible to the last there is one stubborn enemy of the
purpose of God -the human heart and mind, the will of men and women
everywhere to satisfy their own desires.

We have had a hint of this already in Jesus' rebuke to Peter:

"Get thee behind me, SATAN, for thou mindest not the things of God,
but the things of men"
(Matthew 16:23, R.V.).

He had said much the same to the Jews who were rejecting him:

"You are of your father the DEVIL, and the lusts

(or desires) of your father you will do"
(John 8:44, A.V.).

We have only to ask: What are "lusts" associated with throughout the Bible? The
answer is clear: it is always with human nature.

The natural tendencies of our nature are set out very strongly by the Apostle Paul in his
Letter to the Romans. He is contrasting the life of service to God (the spirit) with the
life spent satisfying natural desires (the flesh), and declares:

"To set the mind on the flesh is death; but to set the mind on the spirit
is life and peace."

So there are two ways we can choose to live: trying to do the will of God, or following our
own SO CALLED ''free will''. About the second Paul now has this shattering

"The mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God."

So here is the great enemy of God: human desire. And what a determined enemy it is!
For Paul goes on:
"For it (the mind of the flesh) does not submit to God's law, indeed it
cannot" (8:5-7).
He had said the same thing in writing to the Galatians:

"Walk in the spirit" (that is, live in God's way) "and do not gratify the desires
of the flesh" (notice that "the flesh" demands to be satisfied). He then adds:

"For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of
the Spirit are against the flesh; for these are opposed to each
other", and the result is "to prevent you from doing what you
would" (Galatians 5:16-17).


There is no doubt then where we must look for the great enemy of God: it is in our own
hearts and minds. So James tells us where we must look for the source of our
temptations to do wrong. Are we led astray by some supernatural spirit whispering in our
ear? Not at all; for, he says,

"Each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own


So our own "desire" is the origin of our temptations; and James tells us what is the

"Then the desire, when it has conceived, gives birth to sin; and sin,
when it is full-grown brings forth death"(1:14-15).

The long history of mankind in the Bible shows how true this teaching is. The first pair of
human beings preferred their own desire to obedience to God, and sinned. The human
race fell away into "corruption and violence" and God had to judge it at the Flood. Israel,
rescued by God from slavery in the land of Egypt and given a special opportunity to be
God's people, turned away and preferred to worship idols and to behave in immoral
ways like the godless peoples around them. Jesus, the Son of God, demonstrated His
Father's truth and grace among men; they rejected and crucified him. And in the
centuries following, men have abandoned God's teaching and perverted His ways.
Yes, the great enemy of God is men and women rejecting His authority
and fulfilling their own natural desires.


So then the DEVIL and SATAN are personifications of sin; that is, they are words
used to represent sin.

The personification is sometimes in a single individual. We have seen how Peter

was "Satan". To the disciples Jesus said,
"Have I not chosen you twelve, and one of you is a DEVIL?"
(John 6:70).
And that one was Judas who betrayed him. In this class comes the serpent in Eden, who
suggested to Eve that what God had told her was not true. So "the serpent" becomes
a symbol in the Bible for the power of sin.

Sometimes a body of people, a government for example, could be referred to as

the DEVIL or SATAN. There are two interesting examples of this in Revelation 2. In
the letter to the believers at Smyrna the Apostle John passes on the words of Jesus like

"Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold the DEVIL is about to
throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested . . . Be faithful
unto death" (Vs 10).

This was written in the first century A.D., when the believers were suffering persecution,
because of their faith, at the hands of the Roman pagan government. That was "THE
DEVIL" which would put some of them in prison: fitly called "THE DEVIL" because it
was an enemy to the servants of God.

Or Vs13, in the Letter to Pergamum:

"I know where you dwell, where Satan's throne is."

So Satan reigned in Pergamum? This one did certainly; no doubt it was

the headquarters of the Roman government for that part of the
province of Asia.

Peter refers to the same time of persecution in these words:

"Be sober, be watchful: your adversary the DEVIL prowls around like a
roaring lion, seeking someone to devour''.

That he is indeed referring to the Christians being persecuted is clear from what he says

"Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same experience of
suffering is required of your brotherhood throughout the world"
(1 Peter 5:8-9).

The Roman pagan government was the DEVIL here.


Sometimes the "DEVIL" or "SATAN" stands for the principle or power of sin, however
it may be manifested.
In this sense we can understand the Gospel record of the Temptation of Jesus. We have
seen already how Jesus shared in full our human nature (Hebrews 2:12). As a result
he felt all our temptations, for the Scripture tells us,
"In every respect he has been tempted as we are, yet without
sinning". In his temptation in the wilderness "THE DEVIL" is the personification of
that human urge to gratify his own desires; he utterly conquered it and remained sinless.

When the disciples returned to Jesus, they were delighted because they had been able
to cure diseases, he said to them: "I saw SATAN fall like lightning from
heaven" (Luke 10:18); that is, he foresaw the time to come when not just disease
but all the power of sin and evil, summed up in the term "SATAN", will be thrown down
from its ruling position in the world; it will be "dethroned" and replaced by the power
of God to establish God's Kingdom in the earth.

God asks you to take accountability, not only for your sins, but also for your life. You
have no need to fear a nonexistent supernatural DEVIL. Rather you should listen to
these words of wisdom:

"Fear God and keep his commandment, for this is the whole duty of
man" (Ecclesiastes 12:13).

Let's do a quick questioning on Moses body!!

It is generally taught that the DEVIL is concerned with souls, but this DEVIL is
concerned with the body of Moses. Why should the DEVIL want custody of a corpse?

There are two lines of evidence which indicate that the DEVIL of this passage is
human and not superhuman. Jude and 2 Peter have so many similarities that
Jude 8, 9 can be read as an amplification of 2 Peter 2:10, 11, 12. It is clear that
the description in Peter's account is about humans; therefore the same must be true of
the parallel account in Jude.

The second line of reasoning seeks to show that "the body of Moses" is Joshua the
High Priest in the time of Ezra, and that the DEVIL is the group of disaffected priests
debarred from priestly office. It is evident that Jude quotes Zech. 3:2 from the following

Zech. 3 Jude
An angel of the Lord Michael the archangel
The LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem
The Lord rebuke thee
rebuke thee
Pulling them out of the
a brand plucked out of the fire fire
(Vs. 23)
The children of the priests were debarred from priestly office because they were unable
to provide proof of descent (Ezra 2:62). It can be inferred that this disaffected group
was the DEVIL. The priests would likely turn on Joshua. "Then what of you as High
Priest? Where is your priestly attire?" (No doubt lost during the Babylonian captivity).
Hence the angel's remark: "Take away the filthy garments from him. And unto him he
said, Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with
change of raiment." (Zech. 3:4).

Jude alludes to this event in attacking the corrupters of the Faith.

The "body of Moses" likely refers to Joshua the High Priest. The Greek
word "soma" can be translated "slave" as it is in Rev. 18:13. Compare Heb. 10:5
with Psa. 40:6 where the allusion is to the binding of slaves to their masters by the
piercing of the ear.

(Exod. 21:2-6); also Rom. 6:6 where "body of sin" means "slave of
sin". Joshua the High Priest was Moses' servant (slave) in a figure, since he served the
law which Moses gave.

This, then, is the simple key which unlocks the problem passages about
the DEVIL and SATAN: look for the source of it in the power of sin shown in the
desires, the weaknesses and the actions of men; and the majority of passages will
become plain.

Have we to fear a DEVIL, then?

When God tempted Abraham, remember it was not SATAN, assuming he had
disobeyed GOD, where will you have put SATAN in the passage? His own worldly
desire will be the SATAN here.

Most surely we have -- but not the DEVIL of popular belief. Our
DEVIL is inside ourselves, in our own hearts and minds. But once we understand that
and accept it, we shall be able to rejoice in the great offer of life which God makes to us
in His Word through the sacrifice of His Son.

God should help us to understand.

("How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer")
Mis-translations and mis-interpretations

Theologians have been teaching for centuries now that Isaiah 14 and
Ezekiel 28 give us a perfect explanation of how a perfect Lucifer changed himself
into Lucifer the Devil. They are all liars, all they could do is to cultivate peoples
pocket for their personal GAIN. Thieves in the KINGDOM!

"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!
How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the
nations! For you have said in your heart, I will ascend into heaven, I
will exalt my throne above the stars of God: SOW LOVE

I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the

I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most
High." (Isa. 14:-12-14).

"Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say
unto him, Thus says the Lord God; Thou seal up the sum, full of
wisdom, and perfect in beauty.

You have been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was
your covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the
onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle,
and gold: the workmanship of your tabrets and of your pipes was
prepared in you in the day that you were created.

You are the anointed cherub that covers; and I have set you so: you
were upon the holy mountain of God; you have walked up and down
in the midst of the stones of fire. You were perfect in your ways
from the day that you were created, till iniquity was found in you"

"By the multitude of your merchandise they have filled the midst of
you with violence, and you have sinned: therefore I will cast you as
profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy you, O
covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.
Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty, you have corrupted
your wisdom by reason of your brightness: I will cast you to the
ground, I will lay you before kings, and they may behold you"
(Ezek. 28:12-17)
This, we are told, is a perfect description of how perfect Lucifer, a shining light
bringing archangel/cherub, became Satan the Devil. Is there any truth to this theory?
We will see.

This theory suits Satan just fine, and more so, it fits Christendom even ‗finer.‘ With
this theory (or more correctly ‗hypothesis‘), Christendom has the perfect solution to
how they can justifiably consign billions of humans to an eternal lake of fire. With
their "free will" firmly established in their deceived minds, Christendom can now
teach the world that Satan CHOSE to do evil and has not repented, and most of
mankind has also CHOSEN to do evil and not repent, therefore they are all thrown
into an eternal lake burning with fire, and God is not the least bit responsible.

The Church believes it has accomplished a most marvellous thing: they have gotten
God off the hook of responsibility for all of the sickness, disease, pain, suffering, sin,
evil, terrorism, and death in the world. You see, without free will, God could never
know who is for Him and who is against Him—it‘s the only way, the only "fair" way,
and God is fair and God is good. Doesn‘t this make good carnal sense, and
everyone is happy? It is rank heresy at the highest level; that is what it is!

Prepare yourself for a revelation: Satan was never perfect and then decided by
his phantom free will to become a devil, neither has a single human started out
perfect and then decided by his free will to become a sinner! Now I am well aware
of the fact that people are deceived about these things, as was I. But the Scriptural
truth of these matters will set us free from centuries of unscriptural traditions. The
problem with this "Lucifer fell" theory is twofold: poor translation and poor
interpretation. Let‘s go through it.

Isaiah 14. To whom is God addressing Himself in these verses we quoted above?
"That you shall take up this PROVERB against the king of
Babylon..." (Vs. 4)

God is speaking of and to and about, "the King of Babylon," not Lucifer, not
Satan, not a cherub. And God tells us the end of this man‘s reign:

"Your pomp is brought down to the grave [Satan never died or was put in a
grave], and the noise of your viols [harps or lutes]: the worm [or
maggots] is spread under you [can maggots eat a spirit body], and the
worms cover you" (Vs. 11).

This next verse is where theologians believe God stops speaking of the King of
Babylon and begins speaking of the origin of Satan. What does the end of the King
of Babylon have to do with the beginning of Satan? Really nothing, but let‘s check
out their hypothesis anyway, as it is believed by the Church worldwide, and they tell
us the spirit of God revealed to them it‘s true, unscriptural nonsense and liars.

"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!
How art thou cut down to the ground, which did weaken the
nations"! (Vs. 12).

Notice that back in Vs. 4 God says to take up this PROVERB against the "king of
Babylon." Next let‘s pick up this PROVERB in Vs. 10 after all
the "trees"(different people which feared the king), are at rest because of the king‘s
demise, and see if this "Lucifer theory" fits into these verses without doing
irreparable damage to the kings English:

"All they shall speak and say unto thee [king of Babylon], Art thou [king
of Babylon] also become weak as we? Art thou [king of Babylon] become
like unto us [mere mortals and not gods from heaven]. Thy [king of
Babylon] pomp is brought down to the grave and the noise of thy [king
of Babylon] viols: the worm is spread under thee [king of Babylon], and
the worms cover thee [king of Babylon]. How art thou [king of
Babylon] fallen from heaven, O Lucifer…"?!?

What is this? How can, the king of Babylon, the king of Babylon, the king of Babylon,
the king of Babylon, the king of Babylon, the king of Babylon, the king of Babylon,
the king of Babylon (made reference to eight times in two sentences), suddenly turn
into "Lucifer" in the middle of a sentence? And where are we ever told that
"Lucifer" is a proper name for Satan?

So just where did this proper name, "LUCIFER" suddenly appear

from in the middle of this sentence? Is "LUCIFER" a proper name? Is
it even a noun? Is "LUCIFER" another name for the king of Babylon?
Is "LUCIFER" an English word? Is there a Hebrew word that can be
translated "LUCIFER?"

I am going to shine some LIGHT on this "O Lucifer, son of the morning
star" business and we can all watch Lucifer disappear in the dawn‘s early light. It is
but another heresy from the Dark Ages that crept into the hallowed halls of the
Church. This is a little lengthy, but it is also one of the most intriguing bits of
deception you will ever see exposed, so I will take the time to debunk it.

From my American Heritage College Dictionary, Lucifer n. 1. The archangel cast

from heaven for leading the revolt of the angels; Satan. <>Lucifer <>light-
bringer: lux, luc-, light" (page 821).

The very next word under "Lucifer" is, luciferase n. An enzyme that catalyzes the
oxidation of luciferin." Hmmmmm. What have we here? "Lucifer + in."

And the word that follows "luciferase" in this same dictionary is: ―luciferin n. A
chemical substance present in the cells of bioluminescent organisms, such as
fireflies that produce a bluish-green light when oxidized. [Latin Lucifer, light-bringing;
see LUCIFER + -IN.]" (page. 821).

There it is! Lucifer is the ‗chemical bioluminescence‘ in the cells of



And so what do fireflies have to do with the King of Babylon or Satan the devil?
Nothing, absolutely nothing. Was Satan once a "light-bringing firefly"? No, no
he wasn‘t. Then how in the world did we get this Latin word "Lucifer" as part of
Isa. 14:12, in so many English Bibles?

First, just who was it that fell from heaven, and does the phrase "fallen from
heaven" prove that this person had to have been in God‘s throne room, or at least
in interstellar space in order for him to "fall from heaven" therefore proving that
this must be a spirit being only? No, of course not. It is a figure of speech. Here
is proof from none other than Jesus:

"And you, Capernaum, which art exalted to heaven, shall be thrust

down [from heaven] to hell [Gk: Hades]" (Luke 10:15).

So here we have a whole city being thrown down from heaven to Hades, their grave.
And so it is with the King of Babylon whose "pomp is brought down to the
grave" (Isa. 14:11). These two Scriptures are exact parallel thoughts.

Just what is the Hebrew word found in the manuscripts that the
translators turned into the Latin word Lucifer?

It is very interesting. All of you with a Strong‘s Concordance look up this

word Lucifer. Right after the word Lucifer we are given a definition before we ever
go to the Dictionary to find the meaning. Here is what you will find: Lucifer
(lu’sif-ur) {1} Title applied to king of Babylon.
Clearly the editor of Strong’s Concordance realized that this word (whatever it
means) is to be applied to the "king of Babylon," and NOT TO SATAN THE

We are told that the word in question is Strong’s #1966 which is heylel, from
1984 [halal] (in the sense of brightness); the morning-star:--Lucifer.

What a web of deceit is woven in this "light-bringing-brightness-morning-

star-Lucifer" theory. This word "Lucifer" appears no other place in Scripture.
Was Satan ever spoken of as a "light-bringing perfect archangel"? No. What
saith the Scriptures?

"And no marvel; for Satan himself is TRANSFORMED into an angel

of light" (II Cor. 11:14).

Satan is NOT an angel of light, neither has he ever been! It is the "false apostles,
DECEITFUL workers" Vs.13, that DECEIVE people into believing lies. Satan
appears as an angel of light to the world; he is transformed into an angel of light,
but it is an illusion, it is not true, it is a deception! Paul expels any such theory that
Satan knows anything about "light" :

"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against

principalities, against power, against the RULERS OF THE
DARKNESS of this world" (Eph. 6:12).

Rev. 16:10 is but the continuation of the same Babylonian beast that we read
about in
Isa. 14: "and the fifth angel poured out his vial upon the seat of the
beast [Babylon] and his kingdom was FULL OF DARKNESS…"

So what is this heylel/halal of Isa. 14:12? Here is the problem—too many

translations of previous translations without checking the Hebrew manuscripts
first. Lucifer is the Latin Vulgate translation of the word "xosphoruos" in the
Septuagint, which is a Greek version of the Hebrew of Isaiah 14:12, which the
King James translators then translated over into the English as "Lucifer."

The Latin and the Greek, as well as a supposed form of a "Hebrew" word
in Vs.12 mean "bright shiner" or "shining one." The problem is, however,
that Isa.14:12 was not written in Latin or Greek, but Hebrew. And I assure you
that "lucifer" is not a Hebrew word, nor is it an English translation of a Hebrew
word. Lucifer is Latin, and is related to a group of Latin derived English words
including lucid, luciferin and luciferose, as we saw defined above, all of which
suggest brightness or shining.
Likewise xosphoros in the Greek derived English words such as, fluorescence and

But, there seems to be no Hebrew or Aramaic text in which there is a word in this
verse to correspond. What we find in all such texts is the
word "hehlehl,‘ eill, which is a form of the Hebrew stem "yah-lahl," ill. And
what is the meaning of "ill"? Are you ready? It means HOWL. That‘s
right, "Lucifer" turns out to be nothing more than a "howl" (maybe of ‗hot air‘)!

It has been suggested that the translators of the Septuagint (Hebrew into Greek)
could have overlooked the smallest of the Hebrew letters or been using a copy in
which it had been inadvertently omitted. Thus if the form of the world eill, as it
occurs in this particular text, were shortened to ell its meaning would be derived from
a different root, in fact would be itself a different root, and the sense given in the
Septuagint and the Vulgate would be at least understandable, with one giant
exception. There is still absolutely no reason or rule of grammar for turning this word
into a personal name! It could possibly mean "a shining one," but not a personal
name such as "Lucifer." Doubtless the translators followed the Vulgate as they did
in most of their translating.

Even such an eminent translator as Rotherham seemed to follow the Septuagint in

this verse, however, from his comments within parenthesis, it is clear that he was
fully aware of the fact that whatever this word meant, it was referring to none other
than the context of these verses which is Babylon and not Satan:

"How has thou (Babylon—see context) fallen from heaven, O Shining

One (O howl)—Son of the Dawn! (Babylon conspicuous as Venus). Hewn
down to the earth, O crusher of nations."

Clearly the reference is to Babylon and none other. It was Babylon which was
exalted to heaven (as conspicuous as Venus, the brightest star of the morning) in
her wealth, power, and glory. Yet just as Capernaum, God says she is brought down
to the earth, the one who was a "crusher of nations." Next I will list the King
James renderings of the word that is found in the "Hebrew" texts and transliterations
of its various forms in every occurrence in the entire KJV Bible. Now you can be the
judge. In all Hebrew or Aramaic texts of Isa. 14:12, the only word found is "heh-
lehl," eill, which is a form of the Hebrew stem "yah-lahl," ill,
meaning howl. Here is Kittel‘s Hebrew Text for the Hebrew Stem ill—"yah-

Isa. 13:6 eiliu Howl ye

Isa. 14:31 eili Howl
Isa. 15:2 iilil shall howl
Isa. 15:3 iilil shall howl
Isa. 16:7 iilil Howl
Isa. 16:7 iilil shall howl
Isa. 23:1 eililu Howl ye
Isa. 23:6 eililu Howl ye
Isa. 23:14 eililu Howl ye
Isa. 52:5 eililu make to howl
Isa. 65:14 eililu shall howl
Jer. 4:8 ueililu Howl
Jer. 25:34 eililu Howl
Jer. 47:2 ueill and shall howl
Jer. 48:20 eilili Howl
Jer. 48:31 ailil will I howl
Jer. 48:39 eililu They shall howl (Howl ye)
Jer. 49:3 eilili Howl (Howl ye)
Jer. 51:8 eililu howl
Ezek.30:2 eililu Howl ye
Hos. 7:14 iililu They howled
Joel 1:5 ueililu And howl
Joel 1:11 eililu howl
Joel 1:13 eililu And shall be howlings
Amos 8:1 ueililu and howl
Micah 1:8 uailile howl ye
Zeph. 1:11 aililu Howl
Zech.11:2 eill howl
Zech.11:2 eililu howl

Isa. 14:12 eill Lucifer (??)

I don‘t believe one has to be a Hebrew scholar to see at a glance that "Lucifer" is
totally out of place in this list. The meaning of this word is clear; eill is a verb that
means "HOWL" and not a noun than can be twisted into a personal name such
as "Lucifer"!

Is there no end to the religious lies fostered on the naive Church? I assure you there
is an end, and that end may be soon in sight!

And notice carefully that the Hebrew verb eill in Isa. 14:12 is the identical form of
the first verb eill in Zech. 11:2. Now try substituting the personal
noun "Lucifer" in place of the verb "howl" in the two places it occurs in
Zech. 11:2. Here as in many Scriptures, the trees are likened to people who are
crying out because of the death and destruction:

"Lucifer, fir tree; for the cedar is fallen; because the mighty are
spoiled: Lucifer, O ye oaks of Bashan; for the forest of the ventage is come down."
Such a translation would be nonsense. Or let‘s try it back in Isa.14 where we find the
word Lucifer in verse 12, but notice how this word is translated in verse 31: Instead
of "Howl, O gate; cry, O city…" We would have, "Lucifer, O gate; cry, O
city…" Again, such a translation would be nonsense, as it is also nonsense in
Isa. 14:12.

Kittel in a footnote informs us that it is only the Septuagint (which, remember, is the
Greek Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures) that we find this word ell instead
of eill. This word was translated into eospearos, which Jerome translated
into Lucifer with a capital "L," which the King James translators carried over into
English without checking the HEBREW manuscripts, which would have solved this
dilemma. All Hebrew manuscripts have eill in Isaiah 14:12, and
remember that the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, NOT
Greek or Latin!

Well, there you have it. There ain‘t no Lucifer who was supposedly perfect before
he supposedly turned into Satan. Lucifer is a Christian hoax! What a difference a
Hebrew "yode" (‗i‘—iota) makes. We dare not LEAVE OUT THE IOTAS.

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or
one title shall in NO WISE PASS from the law, till all be
fulfilled" (Mat. 5:18).

A "jot" is a Greek "iota" and in Hebrew a "tittle" is a "yod," which is the very
smallest stroke in a Hebrew letter. And just how important are those little iotas? The
difference between the absence of "i", or the presence of "i", is the reason why, we
have the Lucifer LIE!

Now back to Isa. 14. With "Lucifer" out of the way, let‘s read a couple of versions
other than the KJV and see how they dealt with this strange word ell which comes to
us by way of the Greek Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate:

"How you are fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the
dawn!" You are hacked down to the earth, destroyer of
nations" (New International Version)

"How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn!
(New Revised Standard Version)

There is absolutely no reason to capitalize "day," "star," or "dawn" in this last

version. Here is how the Concordant Literal Old Testament translates this
verse by following the Hebrew Manuscripts rather than the Catholic Latin Bible:
"How you have fallen from the heavens! Howl, son of the dawn! You
are hacked down to the earth, defeater of all nations."

This is the best translation ever,

It is the king of Babylon who elevated himself to high heaven in the heavens of his
own mind, and it is the same king of Babylon who has "fallen from the
heavens," and it is the same king of Babylon who is "hacked down to the
earth," and it is the same king of Babylon who was the "defeater of all
nations," and not a "perfect Satan."


We will now see what every single verse of Scripture that uses the word "howl" has
in common with Isa. 14:12: "Howl, son of the dawn." There is a reason why
God tells the people in thirty some verses, "To HOWL…" And it is the very same
reason that the "…son of the dawn" is to "Howl" rather than to "Lucifer" or
light up like a firefly or some other silly unscriptural nonsense! Let‘s look at just a

Isa. 13:6 "Howl ye [why?]; for the day of the Lord is at hand; it shall
come as DESTRUCTION from the Almighty [that‘s why]"!

Isa. 14:31, "Howl, O gate; cry, O city; thou; whole Palestina, are

Isa. 23:1, "The burden of Tyre, Howl, ye ships of Tarshish; for it is


Isa. 23:6, "Pass ye over to Tarshish; howl, ye inhabitants of the

isle" [why?] "…the Lord has given a commandment against the
(Vs. 11).

Isa. 23:14, "Howl, ye ships of Tarshish: for your strength is LAID


Isa. 65:14-15, "Behold, my servants shall sing for joy of heart, but
you shall cry for sorrow of heart, and shall howl for vexation of
spirit. And you shall leave your name for a curse unto my chosen: for
the Lord God shall SLAY YOU…"
Jer. 25:34 & 37, "Howl, ye shepherds, and cry; and wallow
yourselves in the ashes, ye principal of the flock: for the day of your
SLAUGHTER and of your DISPERSIONS are accomplished: and ye
shall FALL like a pleasant vessel… And the peaceable habitations
ARE CUT DOWN because of the fierce anger of the Lord."

Jer. 51:8-9, "Babylon is suddenly FALLEN and DESTROYED: howl for


Amos 8:3, "And the songs of the temple shall be Howlings in that
day, says the Lord God; there shall be MANY DEAD BODIES IN

Micah 1:8-9, "Therefore I will wail and howl I will go stripped and
naked: I will make a wailing like the dragons, and mourning as the
owls. For her WOUND IS INCURABLE…"

If you wish, you may check every single Scripture that contains the
word "howl," and you will find the same declarations of death and destruction.

Now then, is there anything in Isaiah 14 that is similar to what we have found in
these Scriptures that use the word "howl"? In other words, is it not obvious that the
word "howl" fits perfectly in Vs. 14, whereas lucifer/firefly does not make the
least sense?

Isa. 12:4, the subject is, "the king of Babylon," and not Satan or some Lucifer
of man’s imagination. An interesting point: In Zech. 11:2 when the destruction
comes upon God’s people, God says,

"Howl, fir tree; for the cedar IS FALLEN; because the mighty and
spoiled; howl, O ye oaks of Bashan; for the forest [of people] of the
vintage is COME DOWN."

But when the shoe is on the other foot, and it is Babylon who is brought down
because she did, "weaken the nations" and "did shake the
kingdoms" (Isa. 14:12 & 16) We read just the opposite:

"Yea, the fir trees REJOICE at thee, and the cedars of Lebanon,
saying, Since you are laid down, no feller [tree cutter—destroyer of
people] is come against us"
In a few of the above verses using "howl," we saw the following: destroy,
destroyed, destruction, fall, fallen, judgment reaches heaven, cut
down, laid waste, dissolved, etc.

And in Isaiah 13 & 14 we find the following words and phrases regarding the
destruction of Babylon:

Howl ye… for the day of the Lord is at hand… it shall come as a
DESTRUCTION from the Almighty… every man‘s heart shall melt…
they shall be afraid, pangs and sorrows… they shall be in pain…
cruel… wrath… fierce anger… desolate… destroy the sinners… I will
punish the world for their evil… shake the heavens… remove the
earth… day of His fierce anger… flee every one… thrust through…
fall by the sword… dashed to pieces… their wives ravished… dash
the young men to pieces… no pity… as when God overthrew
Sodom… never be inhabited… their houses shall be full of
doleful [pain causing] creatures… brought down to the grave… cut
down to the ground… brought down [from visions of heaven] to
hell [Heb. sheol/grave]… cast out… thrust through… go down…
slaughter… cut off… besom [the clean sweep of a broom] of
destruction… etc., etc.

Anyone see why God would suggest that the king of Babylon should, "howl"?
And you think maybe these verses are talking about the fall of a heavenly firefly, do

No, Babylon, the greatest kingdom of nations in the history of the world is COMING
DOWN TO THE GRAVE! Just like Capernaum, Babylon was EXALTED TO
HEAVEN, but is being brought down to HELL (the grave of death and destruction).
And theologians and translators would try to deceive us into believing that all this is a
statement about "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer [firefly]."
Does everything spoken of in these two chapters sound like it refers to some chubby
cherub (named firefly) who lost his chubby wings when he got kicked out of
heaven? unscriptural nonsense.

What is actually spoken of in these two chapters of Isaiah 13 & 14 is the history
of world religion and government from the creation of man, through the destruction of
man, and the realization of God‘s spiritual Mt. Zion filling the universe. All the
religions and governments of the world in the history of the world are personified in
these two chapters. Isa. 13:1 begins with, "The burden of
Babylon…" (organized religion and government against God), and ends with
Isa. 14;32b, "That the Lord has founded Zion…" (The spiritual capital of
the Universe governing all mankind). It‘s all right here for those who have "ears to
hear and eyes to see."
Let me give you the history of the world including all future prophecies, in one
sentence: God perfectly planned and recorded His creation of the heavens, angels,
the earth, and carnal humanity, who sinned wickedly and were all drowned (save a
few); who then reached for their own heaven at the tower of Babel in rebellion to the
God Who then scattered them (save a few); who later built Babylon into a great
pagan empire which God destroyed (save a few); who have since built many wicked
and fornicating Babylon‘s collectively called, Mystery Babylon The Great, whom God
warns before utterly destroying again (save a few); and of ‗the Few‘ God is creating a
New Spiritual Humanity of Son-and-Daughter Saviours like unto Jesus, in New
Jerusalem on spiritual Mt. Zion, where ALL will be redeemed (NOT just a few); that
God may be "ALL in All"!

"He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says unto the

So far then there is no sign of Satan in the verses covered in Isa. 14. Let‘s proceed
with Vs. 13-14:

"For you have said in your heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will
exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the
mount of the congregation [appointment] in the sides of the north: I
will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will be like the most High"

This language should not surprise us seeing that this is a continuation of Babylon,
the same system that started at Babel, where they first thought to build "a tower
whose top may reach unto heaven" (Gen. 11:4).

Now Vs. 15: "Yet you shall be brought down to hell [sheol—the grave], to
the sides of the pit [cistern, hole, dungeon, or possibly crypt]" The only time that
Satan will be put in a prison is during Christ‘s reign. This is speaking of the END of
the king of Babylon, not the death of Satan.

Let‘s see if we see any sign of Satan in Vs. 16

"They that see you [no man has ever seen Satan!] Shall
narrowly [gaze] upon you, and consider you, saying, Is
this the MAN [‗man‘? This is no Satan, but a ‗MAN‘] that made the earth to
tremble, that did shake kingdoms."

Just like the Pharaohs and many rulers of nations who taught and thought that they
were "gods" represented in the stars of heaven, and who exalted themselves and
their throne to heaven, likewise, this king of Babylon is nonetheless
only "a MAN." And God Almighty tells him to "HOWL" because God is going to
bring him "DOWN TO HELL."
And that is just what God did, and the archaeological digs in Iraq prove it!
Isaiah 13 and 14 are not a description of the some fabled fall of Satan; only a
pompous king who dies in infamy without even a proper burial.


Ezekiel 28:12, "Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of

Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus says the Lord God; You seal up the
sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty."

Although theologians tell us that Ezekiel 28 also records the fall of Satan from a
perfect cherub, it is the king of Tyrus and not Satan who is being addressed in
this lamentation. The fact that he was called full of wisdom and perfect in beauty by
no means suggests that this is speaking of Satan. Perfect is used in a relative sense
when not speaking of deity. God is merely shoving this in the kings face, as it was
Tyrus who earlier attributed to herself this claim of perfect beauty, not God!

"Now, you son of man, take up a lamentation for Tyrus; And say unto
Tyrus, O you that art situate at the entry of the sea, which are a
merchant of the people for many isles, Thus says the Lord God; O
Tyrus, YOU HAVE SAID I am of perfect beauty" (Ezek. 27:2-3).

This is exactly the same situation as our Lord dealt with in the city of Capernaum. In
fact He says it will be more tolerable for boastful Tyre in the day of judgment than for

"But it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment,
than for you. And thou, Capernaum which are exalted to heaven,
shall be thrust down to hell [Hades/grave]" (Luke 10:14-15).

Notice in both cases it is not God Who believes Capernaum or Tyrus is perfect and
heavenly, but the carnal-minded people of these two city states. The
word "perfect" is used many times in Scripture to mean that there is no outward
imperfection (as in a perfect animal for sacrifice, without any outward blemishes).
Inside, however, the one who may appear perfect outwardly can be totally corrupt. It
certainly does not mean "sinless." Here is Scriptural proof:

The Scriptures say that Noah was perfect in his generation, (but need I remind you
of a slight imperfect problem he had with the grape juice after the flood?) And God
said that Job was perfect in Job 1:8 (which makes us wonder why Job had to
abhor himself and "repent in dust and ashes," Ch. 42:6). And David said of
himself that he was perfect in Psalm 18:32, (perfect maybe if we forget about his
numbering of Israel in rebellion to God, and perfect if we forget that little incidence
with Bathsheba and her husband Uriah).
Continuing with Vs.13: "Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God… in
the day that you were created."

Here we are told is even more proof that this is speaking of Satan. After all, wasn‘t
Satan in the garden of "Eden" and wasn‘t Satan a "created" being? The word
translated "Eden" in this verse is the same word or root translated Eden 20 times in
the Hebrew Scriptures. Sometimes it has reference to the "garden" that God
planted in the area of the country called Eden. Sometimes it has reference to other
lands near the area of Eden, and not the garden of Eden. Sometimes it refers to
the "children of Eden" as in II Kings 19:12. And I think everyone is aware of
the fact that Adam and Eve had NO CHILDREN in the "garden of Eden."
Amos 1:5 speaks of the "house of Eden"—very same Hebrew word
translated "Eden" in every occurrence of this word in the Hebrew Manuscripts. And
Eden is also the name of several persons in Scripture.

Now back to verse 13 and Eden the garden of God." And so, we see
that "Eden" can mean various things, even though Eden is always translated from
the same Hebrew word, which is Strong’s #5731, Eden, ay’-den; the same as
#5730, eden, ay‘den; from #5727, pleasure. #5727, adan, aw-dan‘; to be soft or
pleasant… to live voluptuously.

And so we find that this is a word that has a meaning, and that this word does not
need to be capitalized. Neither is it capitalized OR translated "eden" in other


"Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, After I am waxed

old shall I have pleasure [Hebrew translated ‗pleasure‘ here is eden, ay-
den‘] my lord being old also?" (Gen. 18:12).

"They shall be abundantly satisfied with the fatness of your house;

and you shalt make them drink of the river of your pleasures [Hebrew
translated ‗pleasures‘ here is eden, ay-den‘!]" (Psalm 36:8).

So why should it be capitalized in Ezek. 28:13? It shouldn‘t. Here are a couple of

translations that don‘t (1) Capitalize it, or (2) Translate it "eden."

"Thou wast in the pleasures [Heb. eden, ay-den‘] of the paradise [or
garden] of God" (Ezek. 28:13, The Holy Bible, Douay Confraternity).

"In the luxury [Heb. eden, ay-den‘] of the garden of Alueim [God] you
come to be" (Ezek. 28:13, The Concordant Literal Old Testament).
Although the KJV often italicizes words in a verse that were not in the original
manuscript, but that are often needed to make the English read better, they do not
always do so. Here are the actual translated words for which there is an Hebrew
equivalent in Vs.13 of Ezek. 28:

"In luxury of garden of God you come be."

"In the luxury of the garden of God you come to be."

Now if we retain that word "of" and insert it into the KJV, we would have
this: "Thou hast been in Eden of the garden of God."

If, as the KJV translation suggests, eden IS the "garden of God," then it cannot
ALSO BE "OF" that same garden!

Furthermore don‘t think that "has been" is necessarily correct either (suggesting
that this is speaking of an event long ancient to the lamentation being presently
given to Ezekiel), seeing that the Hebrew language, strictly speaking, has no verb
forms which express either past or future. But isn‘t this verse speaking of
a "created" being, and therefore couldn‘t it mean Satan, as opposed to the King of
Tyrus who was "born" rather than "created" as was Adam and Satan? Not at all!


Whether one is born of a woman or created directly out of the dust of the ground as
was Adam, they are both "creations of God." Here is Scriptural proof
that created can be applied to those born of a woman:

"But now thus says the Lord that created you, O Jacob, and him that
formed you, O Israel…" (Isa. 43:1).

"…bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends of the
earth; Everyone who is called by my name, whom I created for my
glory, whom I formed and made‖ (Isa. 43:6-7).

"Thus says the Lord God concerning the Ammonites… I will judge
you [Ammonites] in the place where you were created…"
(Ezek. 21:28 & 30).

"Have we not all one father? Has not one God created us [ALL
mankind]" (Mal. 2:10).
So much for that part of the theory. Vs. 14:

"…your pipes were prepared in you in the day that you were created.
Thou art the anointed cherub that covers; and I have set you so: you
were upon the holy mountain of God; you have walked up and down
in the midst of the stones of fire."

Well, there it is! What further use of arguing? Surely this is not a human, but a
cherub. This verse clearly proves that this is speaking of Satan and not some
human, doesn‘t it? Wrong paleface! It proves no such thing. Actually it proves to
be a very bad translation. Let‘s notice a few variations:

"On the day you were created, I placed you beside the kherubs on
the sacred hill of God; you walked amid the flashing thunder-
stones" (A New Translations by James Moffatt).

"In the day of your creation they established the anointed cherub‘s
booth. And I bestow you in the holy mountain of
Alueim [God]" (Concordant Version of the Old Testament).

"With an anointed cherub as guardian I place you; you were on the

holy mountain of God; you walked among the stones of fire"
(The New Revised Standard Version).

"With the Cherub I placed you; you were on the holy mountain of
God, walking among the fiery stones" (The New American Bible).

Two things should be abundantly clear from these translations:

(1) These verses are certainly a challenge to translate, and

(2) The prince of Tyrus was NOT the cherub, himself, but rather the cherub was
placed as a guardian BESIDE OR WITH the prince of Tyrus.

A further proof that the prince of Tyrus cannot be, himself this cherub, is found in the
grammar. Where KJV translates, "Thou art the anointed cherub…" the word
translated "Thou" is the Hebrew word "ath" which can be either a pronoun or the
object of a verb. But in Ezek. 28:14, it can‘t be a pronoun because it is not the
same gender as "cherub." The Hebrew word ath is feminine while the Hebrew
word kruwg translated cherub, is masculine.


Cherubs or cherubims are spirit creatures of great power with wings. God placed
cherubims at the garden of Eden to guard the way of the tree of life.
Cherubim were carved and made of gold, then placed on the cover of the ark of the
covenant. Their wings were to be outstretched over the ark casting a shadow over it.
Their wings were to touch signifying that the divided messengers of God will
ultimately be united into one. Also they were to face each other with their eyes
looking down at the shadow-cast ark, signifying that they desire to look into these
deep spiritual things, but can as yet not comprehend any more than the shadow.

"And the cherubim‘s shall stretch forth their wings on high, covering
the mercy seat with their wings, and their faces shall look one to
another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim‘s
be" (Ex. 25:20).

They desire to know the mysteries of God, but as yet, they do not:

"Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us
thy did minister the things, which are now reported unto you in them
that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Spirit sent
INTO" (I Pet. 1:12).

It is an interesting fact that the messengers deliver messages on many occasions in

the Scriptures, but they DO NOT TEACH! That is because it is we that shall teach
them and judge them:

"Know ye not that WE shall JUDGE ANGELS?" (I Cor. 6:3).

There are now two groups of spiritual messengers. One group is obedient to God
and the other is not. One group carries out acts of good while the other carries out
acts of deceit and wickedness. That is why we find in I Kings 22:19 that the host
(a huge number, a heavenly army of innumerable beings; ‗cherubim‘ in Hebrew
means, ‗AS-MANY‘) of heaven is divided on God‘s right side (the good) and His left
side (the wicked). But ultimately they will all be ONE.

"That in the dispensation of the fullness of times He might gather

together in ONE all things in Christ, both which are in HEAVEN [the
heavenly host which is now divided], and which are on earth;
even in Him" (Eph. 1:10).

Cherubim are associated with the mercy seat, the decorations of the tabernacle and
later the temple, and are associated with the Throne of God in Ezekiel. The
possibility that there is cherubim associated with the throne of world leaders also
seem plausible. Whatever their earthly function, there was a cherub associated with
the king of Tyrus. He was with or beside the king, but he was not the king, himself,
neither was he Satan. Next we read a remarkable thing in the KJV in the last part
of Vs.16 of Ezek. 28:
"By the multitude of thy [king of Tyrus] merchandise they have filled
the midst of thee with violence, and you have sinned: therefore I will
cast you as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy
thee, O COVERING CHERUB [??], from the midst of the stones of

Wait just a minute. This is nonsense! God is going to destroy the king of Tyrus, not
the SPIRIT CHERUB! Spirits can‘t be destroyed. WHY WOULD GOD DESTROY

The king wasn‘t the anointed cherub; neither was Satan the anointed cherub. Satan
is nowhere mentioned in these Scriptures. There was iniquity found IN THE
KING (Vs. 15). It was THE KING that got rich by trading merchandise (Vs. 16),
not the Cherub. Cherubs don‘t trade merchandise. God is casting THE KING out of
His mountain (high position of government), not the cherub. God will destroy THE
KING (Vs. 16), not the cherub. God will bring to "ashes" THE KING, not the
cherub. Spirit creatures cannot be turned into ashes as human flesh can. And all the
people that knew THE KING will see this happen to him. The people didn‘t know the

And finally we read this, "…and never shall you` be any more" Vs. 19. Think
how absurd it would be to say that Satan would "never be any more." Satan is
still (27 centuries later) alive and well on planet Earth. STUPID BIG LIE!!

Well, there you have it. Satan was ALWAYS Satan. He was never an
archangel/cherub/light-bringing/Lucifer/firefly. Here is what the Scriptures teach:

So was Satan the devil really "perfect in his ways until iniquity was found
"He that commits sin is of the devil; for the devil sins FROM THE
BEGINNING…" (I John 3:8).

But the Church teaches us that there was a time when Satan the devil
was righteous and would have never thought to murder anyone. So Satan the
devil changed into a murderer at some later date? NO:

"You are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father you will
do. He was a murderer FROM THE BEGINNING…" (John 8:44).

Maybe it‘s time we give this all up. There is no "Lucifer," and there never was
a "Lucifer." There is no righteous light-bringing Satan, and there never was a
righteous light-bringing Satan. Lucifer the light-bringing sinless Satan is a Christian
"He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says unto the


Now for one of the most amazing symbol identifications found anywhere in the
Scriptures. What did Jesus mean when He said: "I beheld Satan as lightning
fall from heaven" (Luke 10:18)? Did Jesus see Satan fall from the sky? Did
Satan fall from outer space? Did Satan fall from the throne of God‘s heaven? From
what "heaven" did Jesus see Satan as lightning FALL FROM? If only we can
believe the Scriptures.


Satan is the god of this world (II Cor. 4:4). Satan possesses ALL the
kingdoms of the world (Matt. 4:8-9). Satan appears to the heads of his
nations as an angel of light (I Cor. 11:12). It was Satan who appealed to the
heaven of Eve‘s mind. It was Satan that caused the people to build a tower that
would reach MAN‘S concept of heaven. The heaven of the minds of those
conceiving of such lofty things. It was Satan who caused the king of Babylon to be
lifted up in his own heaven, his own mind. Listen to his own words:

"At the end of twelve months he walked in the palace of the

kingdom of Babylon. The king spake, and said, is not this GREAT
BABYLON, that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the
might of MY power, and for the honour of MY MAJESTY?"

The king of Babylon had a dream, and in the dream his kingdom was likened to a

"The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached into
HEAVEN…" (Dan. 4:11).

The kingdom of Babylon didn‘t grow into GOD‘S heaven, that‘s for sure. No, Daniel
identifies who the tree represents:

"The tree that you saw… It is YOU, O king that are grown and
become strong: for your greatness is grown, and reached unto
HEAVEN…" (Dan. 4:20a & 22).

The king of Babylon reached the same heaven that the city of Capernaum reached:

"And thou Capernaum, which art exalted to HEAVEN, shall be thrust

down to hell [Hades/death/the grave]" (Luke 10:15).
Sinful Capernaum was never exalted to GOD‘S heaven, but to their OWN HEAVEN,
the heaven of their own minds. Their city never left the surface of the earth, but IN
THEIR MINDS they thought they had reached "heaven."

Now then, with this in mind, let us move ahead two verses and see how all these
Scriptures tie in and harmonize together.

Vs. 17: "And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even
the DEVILS are subject unto us through your name. And he said unto
them, [I know] I BEHELD Satan as lightning fall from heaven [when and
as it was happening through the commands of His disciples]."

Christ‘s disciples were filled with JOY over the power that Jesus had given them so
that even spirits were subject to them. Jesus had just said that He would thrust
Capernaum down from THEIR HEAVEN, their high place in their own mind. Next the
disciples report back that they were able to cast down spirits (demons) from men‘s
minds, from their own heavens. They were excited to tell Jesus what they had done.
They had the power to cast down DEMONS from men‘s heavens, from out of their
MINDS. And Jesus answered them back by saying, YES, I KNOW, I BEHELD Satan
(prince of the devils and demons), fall from the heaven of men‘s minds while you
were doing it! And then even Jesus "rejoiced" (Vs. 21).

God has a heaven. It is a SPIRIT REALM. It is where God lives and has His Being.
Men too have a heaven. It is likewise, the REALM where they live and have their
being—they spiritually live in their own minds, their own heavens.

Notice Prov. 23:7, "For as he THINKS in his heart, SO IS HE."

The ‗heart‘ is the innermost seat of our deepest emotions, but it is accessed
through the MIND. It is what one thinks that determines what one is.
When the king of Babylon THOUGHT that he had ascended into heaven in his mind,
then that is where HE WAS, "so IS he." But ... BUT, it was man‘s heaven and not
God‘s. No ‗man,‘ no ‗carnal man‘ has ever ascended into God‘s heaven of spirit,

"And NO MAN has ascended up to heaven [God‘s heaven], but He

that came down from heaven, even the Son of man WHICH IS IN
HEAVEN [right at the very time He was speaking these words]" (John 3:13).

Jesus could live "on earth" and "in heaven" at the same time! But carnal men
live in the heaven of their minds all the time. Man‘s heaven is a place of spiritual
delusion; whereas God‘s heaven is a place of spiritual enlightenment.

"And I saw a great white throne, and Him that sat on it, from whose
face the EARTH [of man] and the HEAVEN [of man] fled away; and there
was found NO PLACE FOR THEM… And whosoever was not found
written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. And I saw a
NEW heaven and a NEW earth: for the first heaven and the first
earth were passed away; and there was no more sea."
(Rev. 20:11, 16 & 21:1).

It would be mind-boggling enough to think that the entire UNIVERSE could "flee
away," but it would be quite another to then suggest that, "there was found NO
PLACE FOR THEM." That would be absurd if taken literally. ALL THESE THINGS
ARE SPIRITUAL! In the white throne judgment there will be no more a place for the
flesh, for the carnal mind, for man‘s heaven. There will truly be no place found for
them. They will be annihilated in God‘s "CONSUMING FIRE"
(Heb. 12:29 & I Cor. 3:15)!

God will give man a new earth and a new heaven, and as for the great sea of carnal,
God-defying humanity, "…and there was NO MORE SEA."

God will help us to understand

Mis-translations and mis-interpretations

WE are not saying God is evil but then he created all things including EVIL. Evil is
not ‗SIN.‘ God created evil; God Himself is not evil. And strictly speaking, God did not
create sin, nor has God Himself ever sinned. What God has done is created
humanity in a spiritually weakened state that is totally incapable of even
understanding spiritual laws and principle, let alone being capable of obeying them.

"For the creature [and/or creation itself] was MADE subject to VANITY
NOT WILLINGLY, but by reason of Him [that‘s God] Who HATH
SUBJECTED the same in hope. Because the creature itself also
shall be delivered from the BONDAGE OF CORRUPTION into the
glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the WHOLE
CREATION groans and travails IN PAIN until NOW" (Rom. 8:20-22)!

And this was not a sin or mistake on God‘s part, this was weakness by design and it
was part of GODS purpose. Therefore, God is responsible (certainly not
accountable), but responsible for all sin. And God has already taken responsibility for
all sin by Sacrificing His Son, Jesus Christ:

Let‘s take a closer look at the following scripture; most people get confused with this
powerful scripture.

―I am the Lord, and there is none else. I form the LIGHT, and
create DARKNESS: I made PEACE [good], and create EVIL (Hebrew: ra):
I the Lord do ALL THESE THINGS‖ (Isa. 45:6-7).

The word rendered EVIL (Hebrew=ra) in the AKJV and other Bible versions is
translated calamity or travail or sore most times. These changes the quality of
the statement God sent across to us.

Look up the word "calamity" in Dr. Strong's Concordance and you will find out that
calamity is found 19 times in the Bible, all in the Old Testament. Three times
calamity is translated from the Hebrew word "havvah" and it means "ruin or
calamity." Sixteen times calamity is translated from the Hebrew word "eyd"
which is defined as "oppression, misfortune, ruin, calamity and

Now then, what word did the Holy Spirit of God inspire to be used in Isa. 45:7?
Was it "havvah" or "eyd" which really does mean "calamity"? NO. It was
another word. That is the word "ra" which means "bad or evil" and is translated
Here are just a few examples of how this word is used:

"And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is
pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of the life also in
the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good
and EVIL(ra)" (Gen. 2:9).

Or does anyone think it should have been translated the ―...tree of knowledge
of good and CALAMITY ?‖

"And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth,
and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was
only EVIL continually" (Gen. 6:5).

Or does anyone think that God say, "...his heart was

only CALAMITOUS continually?"

"Come now therefore, and let us slay him, and cast him into some
pit, and we will say, Some EVIL beast has devoured him..."
(Gen. 37:20).

Or does anyone think that they really said, "Some CALAMITOUS beast has
devoured him...?")

Look up EVERY one of the 442 verses where "ra" is translated EVIL, and you will
easily see the truth of this word. "Ra" never, EVER, means "calamity." So don't
let these lying weasels deceive you into believing their deceitful and unscriptural

We don‘t know better than God, so let‘s use the words exactly the way GOD has
given them to us in the bible.

The destiny of the human race is indeed GLORIOUS, but the journey
is filled with evil and sorrow. This is not to say that there are not
many beautiful and good things in life, but for most the misery far
outweighs the pleasurable.

God created evil for a purpose. So naturally He will not make evil inoperative at
every turn in the road or there would have been no purpose in creating it in the first

Evil serves many noble purposes. One of which is a back drop for good. Good
cannot be understood or certainly not appreciated without a backdrop of evil.
Evil makes good appear even better and is certainly much more

Evil is necessary for the production or development of good. You cannot name one
virtue that is not in some way produced by the resistance to some form of evil.

All knowledge is matter of contrast and relativity. One cannot know what light is
unless he has been acquainted with darkness. One has no conception of large
unless he also knows of things that are small. Up is only up in relation to down. Life
is the opposite of death, etc. To understand and fully appreciate all of these things,
there are many necessary experiences to go through. God creates and puts us
through these many things in the development of godly character.

All of these evils can be likened to the creation of a beautiful building. Ugly
scaffolding is necessary in the construction of this building. It is ugly and serves no
purpose other than in the actual construction of the building. When the building is
completed, the scaffolding is torn down and discarded. It serves no further purpose
for that building. All evil will be discarded one day. And the last enemy, DEATH, will
likewise be ABOLISHED FOR EVER (I Cor. 15:26) and God will be "ALL in

In our world according to the bible God did not create light to shine IN the darkness.
No, God ―created‖ darkness, itself. Darkness is not just the absence of
light. Darkness was created by God. It does not ―naturally‖ exist independent
of His creating it. This, like everything else in the Bible, is a parable. Mankind
is spiritually in ―darkness.‖ And it is a very painful thing to come out.

―For God, Who commanded the light to shine out of darkness [not ‗in‘
darkness], has shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge
of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. But we have this
treasure in earthen vessels that the Excellency of the power may be
of God, and not of us.‖ (II Cor. 4:6).

Before we go further, it is necessary to know that it is God Who is the Creator,

User, and ultimately, the Destroyer of evil. We will prove these whiles we go

Let‘s starts with this powerful scripture from the prophet Isaiah. Most Teachers and
Pastors have twisted this scripture in the pulpit.

―I am the Lord, and there is none else. I form the LIGHT, and
create DARKNESS: I made peace [good], and create EVIL (Hebrew: ra): I
the Lord do ALL THESE THINGS‖ (Isa. 45:6-7).

God created ra—EVIL. Furthermore God used evil and continues to use evil
against His creatures all day long. Loosen up people of GOD.

This is all the strange work of God. We are all born out of a dark womb into the
natural light of day, but this too is but a parable. We must be ―born again‖ out of
spiritual darkness of this age into the glorious light of the Sun of God. It is a painful
journey, and requires an experience of EVIL to accomplish.
Let‘s prove what I have just said with a very powerful scripture.

―And I gave my heart to seek and search out by wisdom concerning

all things that are done under heaven: this SORE TRAVAIL has God
given to the sons of man to be exercised therewith‖ (Eccl. 1:13).

What a horrible translation! Does anybody understand this at all? My King James
has three superior numbers in this one verse indicating three different words in the
margin. Especially the last phrase:

―…this sore travail has God given to the sons of man to be exercised

What pray tell does that mean? One of the most all-encompassing and profound
verses in all Scripture, and most translations butcher it beyond

NEW AMERICAN BIBLE: ―A thankless task God has appointed for men
to be busied about.‖

JEWISH PUBLICATION SOCIETY: ―…it is a sore task that God has given
to the sons of man to be exercised therewith.‖

NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION: ―What a heavy burden God has laid on


YOUNG’S LITERAL TRANSLATION: ―It is a sad travail God has given to

the son of man to be humbled by it.‖

This is really an important verse; we have got to get it right. Young’s

Translation gets a little closer to the truth than the KJV (king James version) or
the previous three references. He got the humbled part right. But what is all
this ―sad travail,‖ ―heavy burden,‖ ―thankless task,‖ business all about,
am not a Hebrew scholar but at least I know how to read and write: It is not that
difficult if we will just look at the Hebrew words.

Eccl. 1:13 from the King James: First, the word ―this‖ may be better
translated ―it,‖ as some have done.
But far, far more important than all, the word ―sore‖ should be
translated ―EVIL‖ as almost none have done. It is the Hebrew word ra which
always means ―EVIL,‖ and is translated as ―evil‖ in hundreds and hundreds of
other verses. Why not in this verse? The few times that ra is translated ―sore‖ in
the KJV; it ALWAYS means ―evil‖ as in ―evil sickness‖ or ―evil
troubles.‖ SO WHY SORE NOW??

The word ―travail‖ in the KJV is not out of line with the Hebrew, but is nebulous
and not easily understood by most. It would better translate
as ―employment‖ or ―experience.‖

And we have already seen from other versions that the KJV ―exercised‖ is better
translated ―humbled‖ as Young’s and Concordant versions has done.
Here then is a proper translation of this most profound verse:

―It is an experience of evil Elohim has given to the sons of

humanity to humble them by it‖
(Eccl. 1:13Concordant Old Testament).

Now we can easily understand what is being said in this verse.

This ―experience of evil‖ is not the purpose or goal of human existence, but this
is indeed the process by which God is bringing His Sons and Daughters into
glory! Most translations have hidden the meaning of this verse of
Scripture. The translators just couldn‘t believe that God would do such a thing.
They see it all around them. They see it in thousands of Scriptures, but they just
couldn‘t bring themselves to come right out and say it, as God obviously has stated
in the original Hebrew of this verse.

―It is an EXPERIENCE of EVIL that God has given to the sons of

humanity to HUMBLE them by it.‖

And to this agrees the rest of Scripture:

―For ALL his days are SORROWS, and his

travail [experience] GRIEF…‖ (Eccl. 2:23).


Who was responsible for Job‘s trial? Job himself? Satan? God? Look for the
answer later in this letter. Can Satan operate independently of God? Does God use
evil for good? Is it a sin to hold God responsible for all the evil in the world? To begin
with, clay cannot talk back to the one moulding it...
Job was a man who feared God and eschewed [shunned] evil. God gave Satan
authority to test Job. God set the guidelines. Satan caused all of Job‘s oxen, sheep
and camels to be stolen, and his servants to be killed.
He also caused a house to collapse in a wind and kill all the young men and Job‘s
sons and daughters. Satan then covered Job with painful boils.

Would anyone suggest that these trials that came to Job were not ―evil‖ Well here
is what Job called them:

―But Job answered and said, O that my grief were thoroughly

weighed, and my calamity laid in the balances together!‖
(Job 6:1-2).

Calamity is the proper translation in this verse. Now then, does the argument
(which is totally untrue) that God created ―calamity‖ in Isa. 45:7 rather
than ―evil‖ carry any weight whatsoever in any practical way. No,
Job‘s ―calamity‖ was very evil.

Who was responsible for these evils and calamity that came upon Job? Satan, right?
Wrong. Satan was merely the club in God‘s hand. Notice what Job was inspired to

―And said, Naked came I out of my mother‘s womb, and naked shall
I return thither: the Lord gave, and the Lord has taken
away (It was ―The Lord‖ Who took away all of Job‘s possessions and his family.
Satan was merely the club in God‘s hand.)‖

―Blessed be the name of the Lord. In all this Job sinned NOT, nor
charged God foolishly [with wrong]‖ (Job 1:18-22).

And so we have read that God used Satan to try, and test Job, He used Satan to try,
and test Jesus, He uses Satan to try, and test believers, and He also uses Satan to
try, and test THE WHOLE WORLD:

" ... Behold, I have created the smith that bloweth the fire of coals,
and bringeth forth a weapon for his work; and I have created
the waster to destroy. ."(Isa.54:16).

"By His spirit He hath garnished the heavens; His hand

hath formed the Crooked serpent" (Job 26:14).

God does not ―allow‖ Satan to do ANYTHING. Satan was created by God to do
exactly what God wants him to do—nothing more and nothing less.

"The LORD hath made all things for Himself: yea, even
the wicked for the day of evil." (Prov. 16:4).

These are powerful scriptures proving that God is the creator of EVIL, and he uses
EVIL for which ever purpose he desires.

Let‘s take a close look at this Scripture.

―…shall there be evil [Heb: ra—‘bad, evil’] in a city, and the Lord has not
done it? (Amos 3:6).

There shall be all kinds of evil in a city, and the Lord is the cause of it through his
created being SATAN or he brings them on his people himself... World famous
teacher, preacher, theologian, author, Billy Graham said before a packed house in
the National Cathedral, that GOD DOES NOT CREATE EVIL. THAT IS A LIE,
what says all these powerful Scriptures below:

" ... Behold, I have created the smith that bloweth the fire of coals,
and bringeth forth a weapon for his work; and I have created
the waster to destroy. ."(Isa.54:16).

"I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace [good], and
create evil: I the Lord do all these things" (Isa. 45:7).

" ... shall there be evil in a city, and the Lord has not done
it?" (Amos. 3:6).

"By His spirit He hath garnished the heavens; His hand

hath formed the Crooked serpent" (Job 26:14).

―... The evil spirit from God.....‖ 1 Samuel 16:16.

"Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth evil and good?"
(Lam 3:38).

―It is an experience of evil Elohim [God] has given to the sons of

humanity to humble them by it‖ (Eccl. 1:13 Concordant Old

" ... I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will
take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour,
and he shall lie with thy wives..." (II Sam. 12:11).

"That which is moulded will not protest to the moulder, 'Why do you
make me thus?' Or has not the potter the right over the clay, out of
the same kneading to make one vessel, indeed, for honour, yet, one
for DISHONOUR?" (Rom. 9:19-25).

"The LORD hath made all things for Himself: yea, even
the WICKED for the day of evil." (Prov. 16:4).
" ... I will bring EVIL from the north, and a great destruction."
(Jer. 4:6).

" ... Hear, O earth: behold, I will bring EVIL upon this people ... "
(Jer. 6:19).

"And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a LYING SPIRIT in the

mouth of all his prophets." " ... And He [God] said ... go forth, and do
so." (I Kg. 22:22).

"He [God] turned their heart to HATE his people ... " (Psa. 105:25).

" ... Thus said the Lord; Behold, I frame EVIL against you, and
DEVISE a DEVICE AGAINST YOU ... " (Jer. 18:11).

" ... For God locks up all together in STUBBORNNESS, that He

should be merciful to all. "(Rom. 11:32).

"O LORD, why hast thou made us to err from thy ways,
and HARDENED our heart from thy fear?" (Isa. 63:17).

" ... so shall the Lord bring upon you all EVIL things, until He have
destroyed you from off this good land ... " (Josh. 23:15).

"For whom the Lord is loving He is disciplining, Yet He

is SCOURGING every son to whom He is assenting" (Heb. 12:5).

"What? shall we receive good at the hand of God and shall we

not RECEIVE EVIL? In all this did not Job sin with his lips."
(Job 2:10 see 42:7).

"Thus saith the Lord of hosts ... go and smite Amalek

... DESTROY ... slay both man and woman, infant and suckling ... "
(I Sam. 15:2-3).

" ... God will be sending them an operation of DECEPTION for them
to believe the falsehood ... " (II Thess. 2:11-12).

These Scriptures Proves That God Not Only Created Evil, But That He, Himself,
uses EVIL and he Is Responsible For It. Dear reader I don‘t think you still doubt that
God created evil and is responsible for it. Give up your old traditional thinking and
start picking up the truth from where you have been left off.
Maybe these aren't Sunday School verses, but they are Scriptures. These are strong
verses. At times it is hard to emotionally deal with the evils of this world. But I thank
God that it is HE and not Satan or man who controls evil. It is important to
understand that God puts limitations on evil. He doesn't use it indiscriminately.
Jeremiah 18:11 says: " ... I FRAME evil against you ... " This verse alone
shows the boundaries and limitations that God Himself puts on evil.
Satan is an intricate and necessary creation of God to accomplish His awesome
purpose and goal for the human race. When God desires something,

Satan never became Satan on his own free will it‘s a false teaching...loose up

This is not good news for the deliverance churches, but that‘s the


God Almighty is responsible for everything and He brings about everything only at its

"To every thing there is a season and a time to every purpose under
the heaven" (Eccl. 3:1).

The implications of this verse are staggering. The very foundation of human
psychology and theology crumbles under the weight of this declaration of God‘s
Word. This is undoubtedly one of the ten most profound Scriptures in the entire

If we are to be honest and believe this verse, then we must concede that absolutely
NOTHING is left out God‘s profound declaration.

The word "season" in the KJV is translated from the Hebrew word, z[e]man, and
is defined in Strong‘s Hebrew Dictionary as: "APPOINTED season, occasion,
time." And "purpose" is defined as: "pleasure, desire, matter." Sometimes
rendered as "purpose" or "event."

Here‘s a second witness to this grand declaration:

"Because to every purpose [matter or event] there is time and

judgment..." (Eccl. 8:6).

And a third witness:

"…for there is a time there for every purpose and for every
work" (Eccl. 3:17)

There is no wasted motion in God's creation, purpose and plan. Everything

has an appointed time, and everything includes: "every purpose, every work,
every good/EVIL, every event, and every deed."
Is there any real difference in saying that God "gives life" or that God "causes a
baby to be born?" Is there any real difference in saying that God "takes away
life" or that God "causes us to die?" When it comes to death, we
prefer euphemisms. We don't like to hear that "our Mother is DEAD!" We prefer
to say that "Mother passed away."
We don't want to be so honest or brutal as to say "God KILLED my son" but
rather "God took my son."

But the use of mellower-sounding euphemisms does not negate the fact that God
appointed a time for us to be BORN, and He also has appointed a time when we
must DIE.


Far too many theologians misrepresent the Word of God, and therefore pervert it to
suit their unscriptural biases. I have heard of theologians who graduated from
seminary and still did not know that God says in Isaiah 45:7: "I ... create
EVIL." And most who have read it, don't believe it. Are we challenging the word of

Evil has no moral bias. God does not sin when He uses evil for His good
purposes. Men sin when they do evil to other men. The bible tells us that jealousy is
not a good thing, but the same bible tells us that our GOD is a jealous GOD, that‘s
exactly what I am talking about. Evil is only a "sin" when it is used wrongly, and for
that reason it will stay as a sin among men but to GOD is a different issue. God uses
evil for good. The glorious culmination of God's plan will justify His use of evil a
trillion times to the power of infinity!


In the book of Samuel, didn‘t God descend an evil spirit unto SAUL to torment him?
1 SAMUEL 16:10-18 ―………..AN EVIL SPIRIT FROM GOD……….‖

Where Was The Evil Spirit Coming From? From God Unto Saul, Is God Evil Then?
he Created Evil, That‘s The Answer, AND CHOSES TO USE IT (EVIL) ANYTIME
HE PLEASES. Is none of our business but we only have to understand EVIL.

And What About

HABAKKUK 1: 3 ―Why do you tolerate wrong?‖

HABAKKUK 1:13 ―Your eyes are too pure to look on evil; you cannot
tolerate wrong. Why then do you tolerate the treacherous? Why are
you silent while the wicked swallow up those more righteous than
Let‘s execute this scripture in depth with a proper translation.


I don‘t mean to pick on Billy Graham, as he is, after all, a fine and respected man.
Nonetheless, he does personify fundamental religion, and he does teach heresy. I
heard Billy Graham deliver a message televised to the entire world, from the National
Cathedral in Washington, D.C. shortly after September 11th, wherein he stated that,
God is not the Creator of evil. I also have an old newspaper clipping from a Billy
Graham question and answer column in which he again denied that God is
the Creator of evil.

He quoted Habakkuk 1:13 as proof of his statement. I think it will be helpful to

check this Scripture to see if it indeed backs up Billy Graham‘s assertion:

"Thou [God] art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look
on iniquity: wherefore lookest thou upon them that deal
treacherously, and holdest thy tongue when the wicked
devoureth the man that is more righteous than he?"

(KJV—I left in all the archaic English and italics to show added words not found in
the manuscripts).

First of all, one is immediately struck by the fact that Habakkuk unwittingly charges
God with a contradiction of character—if we are to accept this Scripture as translated
by the KJV and many others.

I paraphrase Habakkuk: Since your eyes, O Lord, are too pure to behold
evil and you can‘t look at iniquity, why do you then do it?

Interestingly, of the nearly three hundred times the word "iniquity" is found in the
Bible, Habakkuk 1:13 is the only time it is the translation of the word amal which
means "wearisome toil" and not "iniquity" at all.

Let‘s notice a more literal translation of this verse:

"Thou art of cleaner eyes than to see evil, And to look at toil Thou
art not able" (Concordant Literal Old Testament).

Even this translation does not help a great deal in our understanding of the verse. Is
the meaning of this verse that God absolutely cannot (is unable) with His clean eyes,
to "see evil or look at toil?" Sometimes it is necessary to translate
the meaning rather than just the words.

I apologize for the fact that the translation nearest to the implied meaning of this
verse that I could find is The Living Bible, which is not necessarily among the
most precise or accurate translations in many areas. However, sometimes they
really do nail the obvious intention of the verse. And yes, I realize that is a value
judgment on my part. But anyway, take a look at their rendition of this verse:

"We are wicked, but they far more! Will you [God], who cannot allow
sin in any form, stand idly by while they swallow us up? Should you
be silent while the wicked destroy those who are better than
they?" (Habakkuk 1:13, The Living Bible).

Now we can make sense of Habakkuk‘s cry for a more just judgment from God.
Notice verse two in this same chapter with our new understanding: "O Lord, how
long shall I cry, and You will not hear! Even cry out unto Thee of
violence, and you will not save!" And so, this verse says nothing with regards
to God being or not being the Creator of evil. But the verses prior to Vs. 13 clearly
show what evils are to come upon the people by means of the Chaldeans:

"They are TERRIBLE and DREADFUL… more FIERCE than the

evening WOLVES… They shall come all for VIOLENCE… they shall
deride [laugh at] every strong hold… Then shall his mind change, and
he shall pass over, and offend, IMPUTING THIS HIS POWER UNTO
HIS [the Chaldean] god" (Habakkuk 1:7-11).


Notice very carefully that the Chaldeans are "imputing" this fierce and evil power
that they possessed, to their god.

"Behold you among the heathen, and regard, and wonder

marvellously; for I [GOD] will work a work in your days, which you
will not believe, though it be told you. For, lo, I raise up the
Chaldean, that bitter and hasty [Heb: ‗fierce and impetuous‘] which shall
march through the breadth of the land, to possess the dwelling
places that are not theirs." (Habakkuk 1:5-6).

And there is the plain truth of this Scripture. It was God Himself Who was
responsible for "raising up the fierce and impetuous Chaldean." And they
were a great evil against those whom they slaughtered! And so the very verse that
Mr. Graham used to prove his doctrine turns out to prove just the opposite. Hahaha!
God have mercy. We are no more drinking milk but we are really chewing bigger
bones. How pray tell.

The Scriptures are quite clear on this subject. The verses I quoted above should be
sufficient proof to even the most stubborn reader, that God is both the Creator and
User of many forms of evil, and yet is without sin and not evil, Himself. God uses evil
for good. And this is a prerogative that only God uses righteously 100% of the time.
Why do I spend so much time on this subject of evil‘s Authorship? Because it is one
of the most import truths in the whole world! It is the answer to maybe the most
colossal enigma in all creation—Why is there, and must there be, evil in the world?
Let me state with all humility that no theologian who believes that Satan is the author
of evil, can ever explain why God put evil in the "tree of the knowledge
of GOOD…"!! They might attempt a feeble explanation if God had put evil in its
own tree, but not when God put it in the same tree with good! God is responsible for
not only all the evil in the world, but God is responsible for EVERYTHING IN THE
UNIVERSE, and God is the most responsible Being in the universe. Just
Who‘s responsible for this mess? God is! And just Who‘s going to clean up this
mess? God is!

Consider Joseph and his brothers. Joseph told his brothers:

"Now therefore be neither grieved, nor angry with yourselves, that

ye sold me hither ... "(Gen. 45:4).

Don't be "grieved," or "angry with yourselves," for committing such atrocious

sins, crimes, and EVILS? This was a perfect plan of GOD. This was certainly
a severe trial on Joseph and his brothers. God brought it about, not so He could see
how they would handle this trial -God already knew that. That's why God,
Himself, "tries no one".

"For GOD did SEND ME before you to PRESERVE LIFE" (Gen. 45:4).

It was ALL of God, the end justified the means. Why do men doubt God's ability
to bring about good from evil, and to save all mankind in the only way they could
ever really appreciate God's love and goodness? Even that greatest of evils, death,
will be "Swallowed up by Victory" (I Cor. 15:54). "For even as, in
Adam, all are dying, thus also, in Christ shall ALL be vivified"
(I Cor. 15:22). What was God's purpose in bringing this severe trial on Joseph and
his brothers?

"And God sent me before you to preserve you a posterity in the

earth, and to SAVE YOUR LIVES by a great deliverance. So now it
was NOT you that sent me hither, BUT GOD: and He hath made me a
father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house, and a ruler throughout
all the land of Egypt" (Gen. 45:7-8).

Did you get that? Joseph‘s brothers can‘t be blamed, they had done what they did
under the will of God almighty, this is from Joseph‘s own mouth to his brothers, yet
still they are accountable to it all but God is responsible for it.



Notice that God did not "change" what they planned, or "turn" the evil that they
planned into something good. No, God "meant IT," it being the whole scenario
from start to finish, for good. God didn‘t change anything or turn anything; rather God
planned it to happen just as it happened FROM THE BEGINNING. God has never
ever made a mid-stream correction in His original plan. God always knows the end of
everything from the beginning: "Declaring the END from the
BEGINNING…" (Isa. 46:10). But "Who will believe our report?"

God's plan is all about "life." God creates life. God chastises us in life. God makes
life miserable at times. We are often weak and diseased in life. Even still, we love
our own lives. But ultimately, God takes away our lives. Our parents die, our friends
and relatives die. We know for certain that we, ourselves, will die. Without faith, it is a
frightening expectation. But, we will all be beside ourselves with joy when God finally
gives back our lives with immortality -never to suffer, sorrow, or hurt again. We
simply need to trust God. We'll all be so glad we took the journey at journey's end.


We are aware of the extreme degrees of evil God uses at times. But God knows
what is best for humanity. And really, when we come right down to it, most men do
not suffer more than a few hours, or days, or years, in the extreme. Certainly it does
not deserve to be compared with the end result that God has in store for all His
Creatures. Our Apostle said that the glories that are to be revealed to us are so great
he calls them "a burden!" Imagine having so much happiness it almost becomes a

Was Paul unacquainted with evil? I think not. Note:

II Cor. 11:23-28 "In weariness more exceedingly, in jails more

exceedingly, in blows inordinately, in deaths often. By Jews five
times I got forty save one. Thrice am I flogged with rods, once am I
stoned, thrice am I shipwrecked, a night and a day have I spent in a
swamp, in journeys often, in dangers of rivers, in dangers of robbers,
in dangers of my race, in dangers of the nations, in dangers in the
city, in dangers in the wilderness, in dangers in the sea, in dangers
among false brethren; in toil and labour, in vigils often, in famines
and thirst, in fasts often, in cold and nakedness ... "

This is not to mention all the daily problems of the churches. And Paul was well
aware that it was GOD Who brought all these evils upon him, even though God may
have used intermediaries like Satan the devil.
II Cor. 12:7 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the
abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the
flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me...

Acts 9:16 ―I will show him how much he must suffer for my name.‖

II Tim. 2:9 ―In which I suffer evil -- unto bonds, as an evil-doer, but
the word of God hath not been bound;

All these are evils from God, and yet, Paul's ministry was beyond reproach. All for
the better, GOD designed it all.


Even if one denies these truths of Scripture, they still have to deal with providence.
HAVENT YOU HEARD THAT fifteen people died in a Colorado school. That's tragic,
a week later fifty people died from tornadoes. That too was tragic. Over 10,000 died
in a Turkey earthquake. Next, thousands perished in an earthquake in Taiwan, with
still more thousands buried alive. Not that long ago, 600,000 perished in a typhoon in
Bangladesh. The disease that followed may have raised the toll to one million. Not
forgetting Tsunami and Katrina, One may suppose God's eyes were closed during
the Colorado school shooting. Go to natural disaster on Wikipedia, you will find out
how many have died through natural disaster, But who would deny that God
controls the forces of nature and the weather?

Look at what we call "NATURE." Nature is filled with evil. In nature

almost everything eats another thing for lunch. Lions eat deer.
Foxes eat rabbits. Big fish eat little fish. Humans eat all. All
creatures engage in a lifetime vigil for their own preservation.

The sun gives warmth and life, but also causes skin cancer. The air gives life-
sustaining oxygen, but in swift motion becomes deadly tornadoes and
hurricanes. Water gives life and enjoyment. But water in swift motion kills
everything in its path. The seas furnish us with food. But her waves and
icebergs have claimed countless victims. If you don't think the sea is evil,
watch Titanic. Fire warms, yet when out of control, it destroys. These powers
are all of God.

We need to ask ourselves, ―Does God ―allow‖ all of these things, or does God
create, cause, and bring these evils upon humanity?‖ God does
not ―allow‖ earthquakes, but rather He causes and brings earthquakes:

―You shall be visited of the LORD of hosts with thunder, and

with earthquake…‖ (Isa. 29:6).
―And, behold, there was a great earthquake for the angel of the Lord
descended from heaven…‖ (Matt. 28:2). Etcetera,

Sounds pretty much like what God did in the Indian Ocean to destroy the coastal
regions of Indonesia, doesn‘t it? Theologians refuse to believe that God would
purposefully CAUSE the Christmas tsunami:

―And, Behold! I [GOD] even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the

earth, to destroy all flesh, where in is the breath of life, from under
heaven; and everything that is in the earth shall die‖ (Gen. 6:17).

―The LORD shall smite you with a consumption, and with a fever,
and with an inflammation, and with an extreme burning, and with
the sword, and with blasting, and with mildew; and they shall
pursue you until you perish‖ (Deut. 28:22).

These scriptures are so powerful that they are undeniable, what is the problem with
Christendom? Is it over praise or that we don‘t want to offend God? We are not
adding scriptures or making them up, we are quoting from the same bible that the
Christians Theologians use all day long.


"For OF Him, and THROUGH Him, and TO Him, are all things: to
whom be glory forever. Amen" (KJV Rom. 11:36).

"Seeing that OUT of Him and THROUGH Him and FOR Him is
all..." (Concordant Version).

Does what you just read also include EVIL?

The Scriptures assure us that God did not create things that had no purpose for
existence in the first place. All that God created was "very good." God "created
evil," how can evil be good? That sounds like something God Himself said that we
should not say:

"Woe unto them that call EVIL good…" (Isa. 5:20).

First let me clarify that it is God Who says to US not to do this.

In Gen. 1:31 it is God Who says: "And God saw everything that He had
made [I make peace, and create evil Isa. 45:7] and, behold, it was very

Goodness, righteousness, virtue, character, and love AND INANIMATE things

cannot be created as a rock, or water, or a star, etc. By the very nature of goodness,
virtue, etc., it requires TIME AND CIRCUMSTANCE to develop (or create, if you will)
these things. And so God CREATES all that is needed to develop these virtuous
traits of character and love.

Since any and every virtue that you can think of is the result of overcoming some
form of evil, EVIL, therefore, becomes a very important ingredient in
the development of virtue, character and love.

As God does not DIRECTLY try anyone, He had to create adversaries to do this
"dirty work." And so, God created His OWN ADVERSARY, Satan, the devil.

"By His spirit He hath garnished the heavens; His hand

hath formed the CROOKED SERPENT" (Job 26:14).

" ... Behold, I have created the smith that bloweth the fire of coals,
and bringeth forth a weapon for his work; and I have created
the WASTER TO DESTROY. ."(Isa.54:16).

" ... I will raise up EVIL against thee out of thine own house, and I
will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy
neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives..." (II Sam. 12:11).

"The LORD hath made all things for Himself: yea, even
the WICKED for the day of evil." (Prov. 16:4).

There are lesser adversaries in the form of demons. Satan did not became who he
is, NOPE, he was so from the beginning.

"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will
do. HE WAS A MURDERER FROM THE BEGINNING (which beginning?),
and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When
he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the
father of it. " John 8:44.

Did you read that? He was a murderer from the BEGINNING, God made him so?
He didn‘t become evil with his own free will...lies!!

Wake up people of God, why do you fall for every doctrine?

There was evil present with God before Satan was created, for God
UNDERSTANDS all of the ramifications of good and evil. When all enemies and
powers are brought under Christ's subjection, then evil, sin, and even death itself will
be abolished.

Sin and evil are absolutely necessary in the development of human character, virtue,
and love.
God did not directly entice Adam or Eve to eat of the forbidden fruit, Satan did. But
notice, Who planted the tree? Where was it planted, in a far corner somewhere?
Who made the tree LOOK good and desirable to make one wise? Who knew that
Satan would take the first opportunity to tempt them? Who had ALREADY
PREPARED HIS SON AS A LAMB to be slaughtered for these sins
even before they committed them?

"The Lamb slain from the foundation [Gk:disruption] of the world"

(Rev. 13:8).

(2 Timothy 1:9 Young's Literal Translation) who did save us, and did
call with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according
to His OWN PURPOSE AND GRACE, that was given to us in Christ
Jesus, before the TIMES OF THE AGES,

I Pet. 1:19-20 ―But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb

without blemish and without spot: Who verily was FOREORDAINED
these last times for you"

There is no doubt that these scriptures proves that it was designed

for Adam and eve to sin, it wasn‘t a mistake. If it was why was
Christ slain before the foundations of the earth?
Only Christians have got a better understanding to these scriptures,
Holy Ghost babies, come on and explain.

Well, yes, of course, it was GOD! God did NOT tempt Eve. Satan tempted Eve.
Eve's own carnal nature tempted her – BUT GOD KNOWS ALL BEFORE
CREATION. That is why God slained the lamb before creation.

God didn't need to even be present--although even unseen, God is always present.
God had marvellous, good, and righteous, and unfathomable WISE purpose for
creating things as He is.

It would be impossible to create this world, mankind, Satan, and the whole
heavenly host, any better than God did it the first time! Can we not believe this?
This creation, this world, this generation of wicked and evil people, with all the
terrorists and frightful things happening all around us is EXACTLY AS GOD
PLANNED IT. What power in heaven or earth could possible THWART GOD'S
designed the beginning from the end so no mistakes...!!

Just because we don't always understand things, does in no way ever diminish
God's Sovereignty. God plainly tells us that He knows and sees and prophesies,
THE BEGINNING FROM THE END. Nothing has ever surprised God. God is a billion
times smarter and wiser than most ever give Him credit. Christendom is telling the
world that God's plan is off the tracks and it's up to us to put things back the way
they should be. Adam and eve never failed, get that straight, I can prove more than

Theologians and preachers have one program after another, year after year, trying to
correct the direction of God's creation. Give me a break people of GOD, We need to
worship God for His grand plan for our lives.



God Made Some A Vessel Of Honour And Some A Vessel Of Dishonour. Why That?
Is Part Of His Plan, And No Man Can Change It; Think Very Careful About This

"That which is moulded will not protest to the moulder, 'Why do you
make me thus?' Or has not the potter the right over the clay, out of
the same kneading to make one vessel, indeed, for honour, yet, one
for DISHONOUR?" (Rom. 9:19-25).

God created good and evil (Isa. 45:7). That covers it all. God planted
the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" - not Satan. When God
planted that tree He said everything (including this tree) was "good."

People think that God never intended for man to eat of that tree. Of course He did.
How else could man know "good?" He had to eat of that tree. "Good & Evil" are
two separate things, but the "knowledge of good and evil" is not separate.

One cannot have knowledge of good without knowledge of evil. It is impossible. And
that's why they were both in the same tree. The same fruit. The first time I saw the
truth of this verse, that both "good and evil" are in the same tree, I was shocked. I
had never seen it before. Never been thought before...

Pastors and Theologians always teach that it was God's intention that Adam and Eve
walk with Him in the Garden and obey Him. So Adam apparently went against God's
intention. Untrue and impossible. If true, then God made a mistake-He sinned! If
true, then God doesn't "know all" - He lied! Then God had to go from plan "A" to
plan "B." How absurd. Adam did not withstand God's intention.

God did NOT make a mistake. God does not lie. God knows all. God did not
go to plan B, but rather intended for Adam to sin. At this point in Adam's life, God
made him a vessel of dishonour (Rom. 9:21).

I guess you are not lost? This is all about the will of GOD.
Religion and theologians have so clouded men's minds that many can't even think
straight anymore. Most do not meditate at any length or depth on what they read in
God's Word. If Adam and Eve had NOT eaten of the tree of the knowledge
of "GOOD and evil," would they have had a realization that they had done a good
thing by being obedient? No. They wouldn't. Why? Because they didn't have a
knowledge of "good and evil." That knowledge is in the fruit of a tree that they
wouldn't have eaten from. If Adam and Eve never obtained a "knowledge of
GOOD and evil," how could they ever know ("knowledge") good?

Since this tree contained not only the knowledge of evil, but of good also, why did
God forbid them from eating it in the first place? Or, why didn't He plant another tree
in the garden that contained ONLY the knowledge of "good?" Why not two trees:

(1) The tree of the knowledge of good, and

(2) The tree of the knowledge of evil.

They could have eaten of the tree of the knowledge of good only, and rejected the
tree of the knowledge of evil, and all of the suffering of the human race would have
never came about, and we would all be living in a garden of happiness and bliss to
this very day. Or would we? Why didn't God do it this way? Because God is
intelligent and wise, not stupid and foolish like the people who come up with
questions as these.

God is good (Mark 10:18). God possesses knowledge of "good and

evil" (Gen. 3:22).

God wants Sons (Eph. 1:5). Sons possess the attributes of their Father. There it

One cannot know good without a knowledge of evil. That's why they are both in the
same tree, in the same fruit. We cannot know one without knowledge of the other.

Eph. 2:10 says: "For His achievement are we, being created in Christ
Jesus for good works ... "

What is an "achievement?" Webster's Dictionary says: "to do ... succeed ...

accomplish ... to get ... to reach by trying hard ... gain ... victory ... by skill, work,
courage, etc." Webster's New World Dictionary, p. 7. Do we think "achievement,"
"goodness," or "virtue," are things that fall out of the sky like rain, or grow wild on

Try to name ONE virtue that is not the direct result of overcoming some form of
EVIL. If Theologians insist that God never intended for man to sin or experience evil,
then they are also saying, of necessity that God never intended for man to have any
virtue or to know good!

Let's not delude ourselves. Under the same circumstances as Adam, I would have
sinned, you would have sinned, and everyone would have sinned.
Yes, Adam and Eve "sinned" when they disobeyed and ate the fruit. But it was
God who was behind it. He had already made provision for their salvation from sin.
"The Lamb slain from the foundation [Gk: disruption] of the world"
(Rev. 13:8).

God wants sons. (Eph. 1:5). And God "designated us beforehand" for this
purpose. God knows "good and evil" already (Gen. 3:22). Man has no
knowledge apart from contrast. We can't know what light is unless we also know
darkness. We can't appreciate health without having experienced sickness. And we
cannot fully appreciate life without also experiencing death. And so God created all
these in order to produce sons.

God is absolutely SOVEREIGN! ALL IS OF GOD (II Cor. 5:18).

Man does NOT have a free will. Man only makes "choices" which are always caused
by circumstances over which only God has control.


A.B., M.Div., M.Th, D.D., D. Sac.Let., PhD.,
Litt.D., D.Sac.Theol, D. Humane Let.

―My seven year old son, Blake, was bitten by a mosquito and contracted
encephalitis. He became comatose. I will never forget the anguish I felt when signing
the papers authorizing doctors to remove him from life-support But I will not protect
God from any responsibility for evil. God Almighty is the Creator of evil (Isa. 45:7).
God created mosquitoes that carry encephalitis that killed my son. I can't deny that.
The encephalitis was only the "relative" cause of my son's death. I don't flinch at the
fact that it was God who really took my son.

But here's the good news. God knows how painful these evils that He created are. It
was no sin on His part to create and use these evils. God uses evil for good. And
furthermore, the evils are only temporary. The time is coming when " ... there shall
be no more any doom ... " (Rev. 22:3). And God will resurrect my dead son. He will
resurrect all the dead (Job 14:13-14). And notice please. God doesn't just resurrect
dead "bodies," but dead "people." When God removes all evil, no one will be sad or
suffer again. "And He will be brushing away every tear from their eyes. And death
will be no more, nor mourning, nor clamour, nor misery; they will be no more, for the
former things PASSED AWAY" (Rev. 21:4)!‖

This is the good news from Dr Kennedy that ought to be taught, rather than the
contradictory and unscriptural nonsense taught by mass media Christianity. HE HAS

What astonishes me is that the same theologians who balk at the many Scriptures I
have quoted, then turn around and teaches that this same God will mercilessly
torture most of humanity for eternity.

And He supposedly supernaturally keeps them alive so that they can't escape the
pain. Hypocrites! I can't imagine how such minds function. Think about this.
Lesser, temporary evils, (brought for a GRAND purpose) are rejected, while gross
eternal torturing (for no purpose) is accepted. Here is the depth of Satanic delusion.

Knowledge of interest

But I thought that "God cannot lie" (Titus 1:2)? He can't, but He does send
those who DO LIE.

But I thought that "God tempts no man" (James 1:13)? He doesn't, but He
sends those who DO TEMPT. (Matt. 4:1, I Cor. 7:5, I Thess. 3:5,
Heb. 4:15).

God should help us to understand.

Mis-translations and mis-interpretation

I have been telling Christians for a long time that the crime of "iniquity—
LAWLESSNESS" of Matt. 7:23, is primarily the belief in one‘s own sovereignty—
commonly called "free will."

According to Church teaching and most all teaching of all religions in the world, man has
a "free will" that enables him to THWART the very will of God.

If you or I or anyone can actually and factually THWART THE VERY WILL OF GOD, then
we indeed can "…oppose and exalt ourselves above all that is called
God, or that is worshipped…"

But this thing we call "free will" is an illusion, a phantom, an idol of the heart. It has no
real existence other than in the minds of all those clinging to this form of iniquity. I will
prove to everyone from the Scriptures in the pages to follow that this idol of "human free
moral agency" called "free will" is the greatest single SIN that must be removed from
our consciousness in order to be truly spiritually CONVERTED!

Free will does not actually and literally mean that one can make Choices, create, change his
mind, or reformulate ideas and data, etc., but that those choices and thought processes must
themselves be free thoughts and free choices. "Free will" is only true if our choices are
also free. But free from what?

"It is not in man to direct his own steps" (Jer. 10:23).

Yes man has a will, there is no debate, but man can‘t direct his own steps, even though we
do things on our own but is it free from being forced upon us against our will, or free from
being caused by anyone or anything except our OWN will? Yes, man can think,
process data, make choices, change his choices, etc. But none of
these activities are free from internal or external CAUSES.

It is the teaching that man himself determines his own will, FREELY, without anything
causing his will or his choices to be what they are. The idea of free will or free moral
agency is that man can by himself unaided by anything else; originate his own choices of his

There are laws of science that men do not wish to carry over into his private and spiritual life.
I will admit that it is a real shock when we first come to understand that of ourselves we
cannot make one "free" choice to do good. Something must cause that choice, but the
carnal mind hates to be "caused" to do anything. Free will is a phantom illusion
that has deceived the whole world.
"Where is the wise? Where is the Scribe? Where is the
disputer [debater] of this world? Has not God made
foolish [Gk: ‗stupid‘] the wisdom of this world?" (I Cor. 1:20).

Notice that it is not the "foolishness" of this world that God says is stupid, but rather it is
the "wisdom" of this world that is stupidity to God! And one of the most profound
philosophical and theological pieces of wisdom that is universally agreed upon in this world
is the belief that man possesses free will or free moral agency. Virtually everyone in
all ages has believed this teaching of free will, and yet not one of them has ever seen it
proved either scientifically or scripturally.

Statistically speaking, there has been relatively few of the world‘s population that have ever
heard of the name of Jesus Christ (which name is admittedly the only name under heaven by
which men "must be saved," Acts 4:12). So what happens to all of the billions upon
billions upon billions of boys and girls, men and women, who have never heard the name of

Maybe we should examine for a moment this idea of Christendom that man "chooses to
go to hell."

Just how does man choose to go to hell, anyway? First a definition:

"Choose v 1. To select from a number of possible alternatives" (The American Heritage
College Dictionary).

How does one "select from a number of possible alternatives" unless he is

presented with a number of possible alternatives? But then again, world famous preachers,
says, "You send yourself to ―Hell‖ for rejecting the gospel of Jesus
Christ." How one actually rejects something that they have never heard of, however,
presents its own set of problems.

My dictionary tells me that the word "reject" means: "To refuse to accept,
submit to, believe, or make use of." Can anyone give me an intelligent
explanation as to just how one would do all of those things with regard to something they
have never ever even heard of?

Is there a place and time in every man‘s life when he is presented with, and given an
opportunity to select from either a place called heaven or a place called ―hell‖, where he
will voluntarily live for all eternity? Such a proposition is absurd. People have lived and died
by the billions not having heard of Jesus and Heaven or Satan and ―Hell‖.

After years of following Jesus daily the APOSTLES were not as yet converted. In the
evening of the last Passover Jesus tells Peter:
"And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold Satan has desired to have
you, that he may sift you as wheat; But I have prayed for you, that
your faith fall not: and when you are converted, strengthen your
brethren"(Luke 22:31-32).

Yes indeed, "…when you are converted…." And just when might that be?
Up until the very last day with their Lord, the apostles all believed that they possessed the
power of free will, which could enable them to choose their own destiny, and that they
could and would have the strength of self determinism and free will to maintain that
course. But Jesus told His disciples that they would all forsake Him. In other words, Jesus
was foretelling of events that would cause (even ‗force,‘ if you will) them to change their
wills, against their previously stated wills. They of course, all denied that Jesus knew what
He was talking about.

"And Jesus said unto them, all ye shall be offended because of Me

this night; for it is written, I shall smite the shepherd, and the sheep
shall be scattered" (Mark 14:27 & Zech. 13:7).

The disciples all said that they would remain loyal. But Jesus said that they would all be
offended because of Him. Was there a reason for God causing the disciples to will loyalty to
Jesus and then in the same night to will to deny Jesus? Does God do anything in vain without
a reason? This was all part of their conversion process. God totally humiliated them by
proving to them that their own will was not free to do what they wanted, but that:

"…it is God [not man] which works in you BOTH TO WILL [God causes us „to
will‟] and TO DO [God causes us „to do‘] of His good pleasure" to bring
about His intentions (Phil. 2:13).

In just one night God smashed the presumed free will of all the disciples. They lost
confidence in their flesh after that night. James later shows us just how well
he learned this lesson of so-called free self determinism:

"Go to now, ye that say, Today or tomorrow we will go into such a

city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain:
Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your
life? It is even a vapour, which appears for a little time, and then
vanishes away. For that ye ought to say, if the Lord will, we shall
live, and do this, or that" (James 4:13-15).
Free will where?

James certainly agrees with Scripture and Science that man has the ability "to will." But he
also fully recognizes that there are two things that constantly oppose and change the will of
man, so that it cannot be said that the will is free to will its own destiny for even a
day or an hour.
What are these two factors over which man has absolutely no control whatsoever?

1. Factor number one--CIRCUMSTANCES: What did the Holy Spirit of God inspire
(cause?) James to explain as a major factor in what determines the true outcome of man‘s
will? Answer: "Whereas you know not what shall be on the morrow."

How did all the disciples will to remain loyal to Jesus no matter what, at one moment in time,
and in the next moment in time, they all changed their will to forsake Him? What changed
their wills? Circumstances; One moment they were at ease and safe in the upper room, and at
a later moment they were in the garden surrounded by Roman Soldiers! Fear was the
circumstance that caused their (un-free) wills to change.

2. Factor number two—GOD‘S WILL: Notice the second thing that the Holy Spirit
inspired James to write regarding what will or will not happen on any given day to any given
person. "…if the Lord will…"

Who was in charge of all these circumstances, which caused the disciples to change their
wills? Why God, of course. They did not want to change their wills. They did not desire to
deny their Lord and Saviour. They did not wish to make liars and fools of themselves. They
did not want to be shown that they were all cowards. Well then, why did they change their
wills if they did not wish to change their wills? Were they free to not change their wills? No,
they were not free.



Few students of the Scriptures have learned the truth regarding God‘s stated WILL and His
PLAN or INTENTIONS. They are clearly not one and the same. They operate completely
differently for different purposes.

First we should understand that God‘s will is used both as a noun and a verb. As a noun,
God‘s will is virtually synonymous with His GOAL. It is usually not too hard to tell in
Scripture whether the word "will" is used as a noun or a verb. In the Scripture we just used
to show that things only happen "if God will," it is used as a verb. And whenever God
uses His will as a verb, then it absolutely will be fulfilled and carried out at the time and place
that He wills it.

If, however, God is speaking of His will as a noun, meaning His ultimate goal, then it does
not immediately come about in totality at the place and time that He states it. A perfect
example of God‘s will as a noun and it not coming to total fruition at the place and time
stated, is in what is popularly called "The Lord‘s Prayer."

"Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be Thy name. Thy

kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven"
(Matt. 6:9-10).

We will now look at some of the most profound and yet most misunderstood and not believed
Scriptures in the entire Bible.

"For He says to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion"
(Rom. 9:15).

Just who is in control in this statement, Holy Ghost Babies or God? Man‘s will is not free to
contradict what God says He WILL DO.

"So then it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but OF GOD
that shows mercy" (Rom.9:16).

What Holy Ghost Babies "wills" has absolutely nothing to do with what God WILL DO.

"For the Scripture says unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose
have I raised you up, that I might show My powers in you, and that
My name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore has
He mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will
He hardens" (Rom.9:17-18).

Pharaoh did not harden his own heart—God said that He hardened it.
Remember I said that God has a stated will as a goal and an active will in the plan or process
of obtaining His stated will? Right here we can see this principle in action.

How hard is that to understand? But who will believe it? From Pharaoh‘s birth until his death,
God had a purpose for Pharaoh‘s life, and God controlled every aspect of it. Pharaoh had
not "free will" in any of these events. God changes not; He operates the same way in
everyone‘s life. You will either be a vessel of honour or a vessel of dishonour, and it is ALL


So God has mercy upon whom He will have mercy and whom He wills, He hardens. But
when I tell people that this is how God operates, they find fault with it. They say that it isn‘t
fair. They say we are mere puppets if this is the way God operates. How can God blame and
punish people for doing what God Himself caused them to do in the first place? The Apostle
Paul got the same carnal-minded criticisms of God‘s plan:

"You will say then unto me, why does He [God] yet find fault? For
who has resisted His will [Gk: boulema—‗resolve, purpose, a deliberate
intention‘]?" (Rom. 9:19).

This is an amazing Scripture. This Scripture shows the difference in attitude between those
who understand God‘s plan and will and those who do not.
After explaining to the Romans that God raised Pharaoh up for a specific purpose in God‘s
plan, Paul foresees the attitudes of his listeners. They will reason that if God is the One
behind our actions, and we are totally incapable of doing other than what He determines we

First it is most important that we look at and understand the word translated "will" in Rom.
9:19. It is not the usually Greek word, which is translated "will" hundreds of times in the
New Testament. This Greek word boulema is used but twice in the Bible, here in Rom.
9:19 and in Acts 27:43 where it is translated "purpose."

So the question that Paul is setting up is not "…who has resisted His will?" but
rather, "who has resisted His purpose [His plan, His intention]?"

God has a will and God has a plan and purpose to reach that will. And
no small part of reaching His desired will is to set men against His will, just as He did with
Pharaoh. But no one has ever hindered God‘s plan and purpose in reaching that goal and
stated will. God‘s will, will be done in His time.

So back to Paul‘s questioners: If God causes us to do what we do, and no one ever has or ever
can go against or resist that purpose of God, why does He blame us when we sin? And again,
I will let Paul answer, since the question was directed to him. But you know what? Paul does
not even deign to answer their question. That‘s right; Paul proposes the question and then
does not directly answer it. He considers the very question itself too demeaning, if not
blasphemous to answer. Instead He says this:

"Nay but, O man, WHO ARE YOU that replies against God? Shall the
thing formed [that‘s us] say to Him that formed it, [that‘s GOD] why have
you made me thus? Has not the Potter [GOD] power over the
clay [man] of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour and
another unto dishonour?" (Rom. 9:20-21).


Could anything be plainer? God, the Potter, does not owe an explanation to the pot as to why
He made the pot the way He desired! And God desires to make some pots honourable and
some pots dishonourable. Why? Because He is a mean and nasty God No, because He has a
plan, a purpose, intentions, to save all humanity in the end; that IS THE "WILL" OF GOD.
And if you will continue reading chapters 10 and 11 of Romans, you will plainly see that
those who are lost along the way in God‘s plan will all be saved in the end.

What is the conclusion of THE WHOLE MATTER? How good of a Potter is God? Will He
have to destroy most of His pots for all eternity? If God is the Potter and we are the pot, how
can the pot be responsible for ANYTHING? Can a pot be responsible for anything?

But doesn‘t God change the way He operates from time to time with regards to man‘s will?
Let God‘s Word answer:

"And as a vesture shall Thou fold them up, and they shall be
changed: but THOU ART THE SAME…" (Heb. 1:12).

"For I am the Lord, I CHANGE NOT…" (Mal. 3:6).

"Jesus Christ the SAME yesterday, and today, and forever"

(Heb. 13:8).

Now, had God supernaturally strengthened Peter‘s resolve to remain loyal despite the
tremendous fear to give in, he would have remained loyal, because the greater power will
always be dominant. And since God is ALL mighty and ALL-powerful He can ALWAYS

Before conversion Peter thought he possessed free will:

"Peter answered and said unto Him, Though all men shall be
offended because of you, YET WILL I NEVER BE OFFENDED"
(Matt. 26:33).

Jesus responded that Peter had no more freedom of the will to stick by such a statement than
a donkey:

"Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this night, before
the cock crow, YOU SHALL DENY ME thrice" (Vs. 34).

Peter again responds from the pinnacle of his presumed free will and CORRECTS Jesus to
His face:

"Peter said unto Him, Though I should DIE WITH THEE, YET WILL
I NOT DENY THEE. Likewise also said ALL THE DISCIPLES" (Vs. 35).

And the rest is history. When Peter was confronted the third time we read this:

"Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I KNOW NOT THE

MAN. And immediately the cock crew… And he went out, and wept
bitterly" (Matt. 26:74 & 75b) Free will? Where? Give it up.

"But all this was done, that the Scriptures of the prophets might be
(Matt. 26:56).
"Free Will" DEFINED

The American Heritage College Dictionary:

"Free will n. 1 The ability or discretion to choose; free choice 2. The power of making free
choices that are unconstrained by external circumstances or by an agency such as fate or
divine will."

My Meriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary/Eleventh Edition has an even more precise

"Free will n. freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes
or by divine intervention"

Notice that our dictionaries are specific in stating that it is "FREE choice" that is the
definition of "free will," rather than just "choice" alone. To be an expression of "free
will," choices must also be free. Free from what? We just read it:

 Free from "PRIOR CAUSES."

 Free from "CONSTRAINT."
 Free from "FATE."
 Free from "DIVINE WILL."

Now then, will anyone contend that computers have unprogrammed and uncaused, free wills?
So now we have proof that making choices is not the same as "free will."

Computers do not have "free wills," yet THEY CAN MAKE CHOICES, but those
choices are anything but free. Their choices are all a matter of PRE-programming. They
cannot think and act independently of "causes." Neither can man think or do anything
outside of the realm of "causes." In order for an effect to be present, there must first be a
cause, and once something is caused, the effect must follow, and neither could have been

What was the first historically recorded choice of our first parents? We read of Mother Eve

"…she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat…" (Gen. 3:6).

It is generally taught that Adam and Eve were spiritually perfect immediately after their
creation, seeing that it says,

"And God saw everything that He had made, and, behold, it was very
good…" (Gen. 1:31).
Never mind the fact that even poisonous snakes were also "very good." Of course everything
God made was "good." It was, in fact, even "perfect"—perfect, that is, for the purpose for
which it was created.

But did our first parents have perfect and good spiritual character of heart when God
completed them? Absolutely not! Far from it! They were as carnal-minded as any two people
who have ever lived.

"Love NOT the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the
love of the Father IS NOT IN HIM. For ALL that is in the world,
1. the lust of the FLESH,
2. the lust of the EYES,
3. and the pride of LIFE,
is not of the Father, but is of the world.

And the world passes away, and the lust thereof: but he that does
the will of God abides forever" (I John 2:15-17).

Notice that "…ALL that is in the world…"—all the sins of the world have their
origin in one of these three categories of sin that proceeds "out of THE HEART." Not
out of the "will" or out of the "mind," but "out of THE HEART." The "will" and the
"mind" are subject to the "heart," and not the other way around. The heart is not subject to the
will, neither is the heart subject to the mind, but rather both of these are subject to the
birthplace of all human functions—the HEART!

Simply and unarguably, Jesus states as a fact, that all evil thoughts and sins proceed OUT OF

"And when the woman saw that the tree was GOOD FOR
FOOD… Gen. 3:6
1. "…lust of the FLESH…" (I John 2:15)

and that it was PLEASANT TO THE EYES… Gen. 3:6

2. "…lust of the EYES…" (I John 2:15)

and a tree to be DESIRED TO MAKE ONE WISE Gen. 3:6

3. "…the PRIDE OF LIFE" (I John 2;15)


BEFORE she actually ate of the forbidden fruit;
ALL of Eve‘s evil thoughts of pride, vanity, lust, greed, disobedience, and finally thievery
proceeded NOT from Eve‘s supposed "free will," but rather from out of her
HEART. And the only reason these sins could come out of her heart is because
of the forbidden fruit, she committed every category of sin in the world. And need I remind
us that we were also, ALL IN ADAM, before he ate of the tree (I Cor. 15:22). Will we
deny our own eyes and the Scriptures we have just read?


Whatever that HAS HAPPENED HAD TO HAPPEN; The CAUSES of all happenings,
MADE all of the effects come into existence. Nothing that has a cause can ever be stopped,
for if the cause could be stopped, the effect would have never happened, and we would not
have the existence of any such cause to even be talking about in the first place. Now then, if
ALL effects are the result of "something," namely a "cause," bringing about the
effect, what brings about the "cause" OF the "effect?" …LAWS CAUSETH


"In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth."
(Gen. 1:1).

Man can "create" nothing—not even a thought:

"Through faith we understand that the worlds [ages] were
framed [prepared] by the Word of God, so that things which are seen
were not made of things which do appear [are visible]" (Heb. 11:3).
Invisible things are nonetheless REAL.

Now for maybe the most profound and all-encompassing statements in all Scripture:

"In Whom [GOD] also we have obtained [‗obtained‘ not ‗earned‘] an

inheritance, being PREDESTINATED [our ‗destiny‘ was ‗pre‘ arranged by God,
not us] according to the PURPOSE OF HIM [not the free will, OF US!] Who
OWN WILL [not OUR OWN WILL]" (Eph. 1:11)……where is the free will??? People
of GOD wake up from slumber!!!!!


Was it Eve‘s will from the beginning ("free will" or otherwise), that she would eat the
forbidden fruit? No, it wasn‘t. Let‘s read it:

"Now the serpent was more subtle [cunning] than any beast of the
field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman,
Yea, has God said, Ye [you and your husband] shall not eat of every tree
of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of
the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which
is in the midst of the garden, God has said, Ye shall not eat of it,
neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die."

Eve was not yet deceived: she was not as yet caused to disobey God. She set the serpent
straight by telling him that his statement wasn‘t completely true. They could eat of all of the
fruit in the garden EXCEPT ONE. Eve was okay with that commandment from God. Well
why did she then eat of the forbidden fruit? WHAT CHANGED?

Did Eve‘s "heart" change? No, she had the same heart she was created with.
Did Eve‘s "mind" change? Yes it did.
Did Eve‘s "will" change? Yes, of course it did.

Even though Eve had a deceitful heart, there was something else that CAUSED her to change
her mind and her will regarding the forbidden fruit. The Apostle Paul plainly tells us what
CAUSED Eve to change her mind and her will. Eve did not "freely" will to sin.
Her choice to sin was not "free" from an external cause. IT WAS
CAUSED, and when something is CAUSED to happen, it could not
have been "free" to NOT HAPPEN.

"But I fear, lest by any means, AS the serpent

BEGUILED [Gk: ‗DECEIVED‘] Eve through HIS subtlety [craftiness]…"
(II Cor. 11:3).

Where does anyone see one single word here to the effect that Eve deceived HERSELF, or
caused HERSELF to sin, or "freely" willed HERSELF into a different frame of mind


Did Eve herself think that she "freely" willed to sin WITHOUT A CAUSE?

"And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that you have
done? And the woman said [Yes, just what did ‗the woman say?‘ Did she say that
she "freely willed" to commit this sin? Did she say it was her and all her and nothing but her
that did this? Or did she say…], The SERPENT BEGUILED ME… [and BECAUSE
the serpent beguiled or deceived her, we now have a CAUSE], and I did eat"
(Gen. 3:13).

And what did God have to save about all this blame casting on Eve‘s part?
Let‘s read it:
"And the Lord God said unto the serpent, because YOU HAVE DONE
THIS, you are cursed above all cattle…" (Vs. 14).
There it is. God‘s Own answer. But will we accept God‘s answer? For most, probably no,God
plainly said that it was the serpent that "has done this." Eve said it was the serpent that
deceived her and God Himself also conceded that it was the serpent that "has done
this." That was the CAUSE, and that was the reason for the serpent‘s punishment.


How about Adam? Does he fare any better than his wife? Did Adam eat the forbidden fruit
and sin by his OWN ―FREE WILL‖? Or do the Scriptures tell us that he too was CAUSED
to have his will do what he did?

"And the man said, THE WOMAN whom You gave to be with
me, SHE GAVE ME OF THE TREE, and I did eat" (Vs. 12).

And again, did God say something like" "Oh sure, Adam, blame it on your WIFE! You know
that you ‗freely‘ without any outside cause whatsoever, decided on your own to eat the
fruit." Is that what God intonated to Adam? Let‘s read it:
"And unto Adam He said, because [‗because‘—here is the real CAUSE] YOU
eaten of the tree …" (Vs. 17).

Does anyone see here where God says, "Because you have hearkened unto the voice of our
OWN ―FREE WILL‖, and have eaten of the true…?" Well? No, before
Adam "willed" (and NOT FREELY), but willed to eat of this fruit, his heart was influenced
to do something that it already had all the potential in the world of doing. Namely, disobeying
His God and Maker, and what was that? HIS WIFE‘S VOICE, and at THAT point in the
process, Adam began to "will" this act, and his mind formulated the actual physical action
of doing the eating.

You see, Adam was willing to die for his new bride, just as Jesus was willing to die for His
bride, the church.

God doesn‘t even hint that Adam did what he did "freely." God Himself admits that the

God never FORCED anyone to sin or go against whatever their will is at the precise time that
his will is changed by a cause. Men volunteer to sin. They don‘t need to be "forced"—
they (we) are SINNING MACHINES! Most men (not all) can be made to sin at the
drop of a photograph. (That is, if the photograph is that of a sexy young lady in high heels
and a mini-skirt). He doesn‘t need to be ‗FORCED‘ to lust and sin over the young lady, even
though it may not have been his conscious will TO LUST just prior to seeing the sexy

Who created man with such passions and desires? Who created Testosterone?

ALL have sinned because it takes SPIRITUAL POWER not to sin. And God did not give our
first parents that kind of spiritual power. They were spiritually weak as water.

We read in Jer. 17:9:

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked:
who can know it?"

We know from Scripture that God "…creates EVIL…" (Isa. 45:7), but did He also
create man‘s heart in a "desperately wicked" state? No, He did not. God did not
FORCE upon man, at creation, a "desperately WICKED" heart. Let‘s read this verse
from the Jewish Publication Society Bible,
"The heart is deceitful above all things, and it is
EXCEEDING WEAK—who can know it."

God did not create man‘s heart "desperately wicked" as the KJV suggests, but rather
He did create the human heart, "exceeding WEAK."

From the NAS Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible with Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek
Dictionaries the word translated WICKED as in KJV is ―anash‖ in Hebrew which
means to be WEAK or SICK.
Desperate (-ly wicked) is used by KJV as a figurative word and does not give us a proper
understanding of the message, most translators including KJV has based the second line of
the verse upon the first line ―The heart is deceitful above all things‖ therefore

The seat of emotions and desires is the HEART. And God made the
heart "exceeding WEAK." Man did not sin because he "freely willed" to sin, but
because his heart was so exceedingly WEAK. That is why it takes next to nothing to persuade
the heart of man to DESIRE SIN.

Once the heart senses a feeling or emotion, it begins to desire something. These very thoughts
of desire come from the heart, seeking fulfillment. At this point in the process the will is
manifested. It now becomes the driving force within you to accomplish the thoughts and
emotions of the heart. The will is not the original instigator in this chain of events; it is not
even the second in line, but rather the third.

 The will of man has no power until first his heart DESIRES,
 Second these desires are formed into actual THOUGHTS,
 Then at this third stage the will purposes to find fulfillment for
all that is coming out of the heart.

The heart played a huge role in Adam‘s decision to also partake of the forbidden fruit:
1 Tim. 2:14 "And Adam was NOT deceived, but the woman being
deceived was in the transgression (a crime or any act that violates a law)."

Why did Adam sin if he was NOT deceived as his wife was? Again, the answer goes back to

Adam LOVED his wife dearly. He never wanted to be separated from her. But he knew that
the wages of eating the forbidden tree was to be death. But did he fully comprehend all that
death entailed? Probably not, But whatever the penalty would be or how it would be carried
out, Adam knew that he did not want to be separated from his wife. Notice what He said to

"And the man said, the woman whom you gave to be WITH ME, she
gave me of the tree, and I did eat."(Gen. 3:12).

Isn‘t that interesting? Adam did not say: "The woman whom you gave TO ME." Or, "The
woman whom you gave FOR ME," But rather, "The woman whom you gave to
be WITH ME," Adam reminded God that He created Eve to be ‗WITH‘ him, not apart
from him. And if Adam had obeyed God, whereas his wife did not, he feared being
SEPARATED from Eve. And so he also ate of the fruit and sinned, not because he was
deceived as Eve was, but because he loved her in his heart so much that he couldn‘t bear the
thought of not being "WITH" her.

And so, did Adam "freely" WITHOUT A CAUSE choose to eat the forbidden fruit? What
nonsense. Adam had the BIGGEST REASON in the world that CAUSED him to sin and
remain with his wife!

So if you are looking for "free" will in the Garden at the time of our first parents' creation,
forget it, 'cause it ain‘t there!


"For the creature [Gk: ‗creation‘] was made [put under, subordinate to, to
obey] subject to vanity [Gk: ‗futility‘], not willingly, but by reason of
Him Who has subjected the same in hope." Romans 8:20.

WOW! What have we here? Free will? I think not. Pay close attention to the words that God

 "WAS MADE"— This is an ACT or CAUSE of God: Not of man‘s will.

 "SUBJECT TO VANITY"—CAUSED by God: Not man‘s choice.
 "NOT WILLINGLY"—According to God‘s will: Not man‘s will.
 "BY REASON OF HIM"—By reason of GOD: Not by reason of man.
 "WHO HAS SUBJECTED"—Subjected by GOD: Not chosen by man.
So where is the "free" will in all this? There is no free will in all this!

Notice verse 21:

"Because the creature [Gk: ‗creation‘] itself also shall be delivered
from THE BONDAGE OF CORRUPTION into the glorious liberty of the
children of God."

Let‘s read this

"Then said Pilate unto Him, Speak you not unto me? Know you not
that I HAVE POWER to crucify you, and have POWER TO RELEASE
YOU? Jesus answered,
You could have NO POWER AT ALL against Me, except it were
GIVEN YOU from above…" (John 19:10-11).


What do we learn from these verses? Are we to believe that for this particular event (the
Crucifixion of our Lord), God supernaturally supplied Pilate with the power to perform his
dirty work? Is that what we learn?

Pilate already KNEW that he possessed power—he told Jesus he possessed this power. He
possessed it for some time, that‘s how Pilate was sure that this power was available to him
whenever he needed it. But from where did Jesus say Pilate‘s power came from? "…from

So, what about the ruler before Pilate? Did he have power? Where did that power come
from? "…from ABOVE." And what about the neighboring cities, states, powers, countries
and kingdoms? Where did THEIR power come from? "…from ABOVE." Where has all
the power of every city, state, and nation, farm, company, household, and individual who has
ever lived, come from? "…from ABOVE.

Where does all power in heaven and earth come from? "…from ABOVE." Therefore,
man is subject to the power that enables him to do things, and as we
have already seen, man has no power to do anything except what God has already determined
that he WILL DO, and MUST DO.

"There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in

Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free
from the law of sin and death" (Rom. 8:1-2).

Notice that one law frees us from another law, but we still remain under some law. All
unconverted carnal-minded humanity is under "the LAW of sin and death." That law
controls the unregenerate man. And he cannot, of his own will, break the controls of that law.
That law will control him until he dies or unless God intervenes with a different offsetting
law, namely, "the law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus." But when we are
made free, does that mean that we then have "free will?"

"If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free
indeed" (John 8:36).


The carnal mind is a mind debarred (disqualified) of spiritual understanding. Not

only does it not understand spiritual things; it is an impossibility to do so. The carnal mind
cannot spiritually repent. Therefore it is not "free." It is in fact, enslaved to sin.
No "slave" is "free." Let‘s learn a few very basic Truths:

1. "God [is] SPIRIT" (John 4:24).

2. "…the Words that I speak unto you are SPIRIT…"

(John 6:63).

3. "Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but

the SPIRIT which is of God; that we might know the things that
are freely given to us of God.
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man‘s
wisdom teaches, but which the Holy SPIRIT teaches;
comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
But the natural man [still being carnal-minded] receives not the
things of the SPIRIT of God: neither CAN HE know them,
because they are spiritually discerned" (I Cor. 2:12-14).

Clearly, the natural mind of man unaided by the Spirit of God, is not "free" to receive "the
things of the Spirit of God, neither CAN HE KNOW THEM…"

God is SPIRIT and the words of Christ are SPIRIT. To understand these words we must have
the Spirit, which is of God. We can then "compare" or (Greek: "match") spiritual
with spiritual, and understand.

If we have the Spirit of God we can do this. But if we are carnal-minded and have not the
Spirit of God, we cannot do this. Here is why:

"Because the carnal mind is enmity [hatred] against God: for it is NOT
subject to the [spiritual] law of God, neither indeed CAN BE"
(Rom. 8:7).
Did Jesus obey His God and Father, without a cause?

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, [truly, truly—
what Jesus is about to say is the Gospel Truth!] I say unto you, THE SON CAN DO


Can we obey our Lord Jesus Christ, without a cause?

"I am the Vine, ye are the branches: He that abides in Me, and I in
him, the same brings forth much fruit, for WITHOUT ME YE CAN DO
NOTHING" (John 15:5).

Where then is the "freedom of will" and "freedom of choice" in these two
statements of God‘s Word? They are nowhere. There is no such thing. They don‘t exist. The
theory of "free moral agency" is one of the foolish and stupid wisdoms of this world
and is no different to the theory evolution, Trinity and the others preached in Christendom,


The free will scholars themselves have had to re-adjust their theory in the light of obvious
scientific and Scriptural proof against free will. They assure us that although man does not
possess total free will, he does, nonetheless, possess "limited free will." That is, man‘s
will is limited, but within those limits, the will is completely and totally free. Oh really?
Here is how my Twentieth Century Webster‘s Dictionary
defines "limited, a. restricted" (Page 963). And here is how this same dictionary
defines "free, a. without restriction" (Page 682). Got
it? "Limited" means: RESTRICTED, and "free" means: WITHOUT

So scholarly theologians would have us believe that man possesses a will that
is, "RESTRICTED WITHOUT RESTRICTION." What? Does anyone see a problem
with this limited free will theory? Does the word "contradiction" come to mind?


The truth of conversion is a simple one, if we believe the Scriptures and don‘t try to bring it
about by some phantom free will. It is all of God.

How do the Scriptures say we become converted? Does an ounce of "free will" enter into
the conversion process according to the Scriptures?
1. "Or despise you the riches of HIS goodness [‗His
goodness‘; not our free will] and forbearance and
longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God
LEADS [God‘s ‗leading‘ is the CAUSE] you to
repentance?" (Rom. 2:4). Where is the ‗free will‘ in this statement? "God
LEADS…" is the cause of repentance, not free will.

2. "No man CAN come to Me, except the Father which has
sent Me draw [Gk: ‗drag‘] him: and I will raise him up at the last
day" (John 6:44). This verse is plain: "No man CAN…" come to Christ of
his own will. It is the Father "dragging" him that is the cause of one coming to
Christ, not his own supposed free will.

3. "You have not chosen Me, but I HAVE CHOSEN

YOU…" (John 15:16). "I have CHOSEN you…" is the CAUSE and it is
by Christ‘s will, not man‘s will.

4. "I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live; yet not I,

but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh
I live by the faith OF the Son of God [not faith ‗IN‘ the Son of God, but
the very faith ‗OF‘ the Son of God—it is His faith, not ours until He gives us some of
it] Who loved me, and gave Himself for me" (Gal. 2:20). It is not by
the ‗free will‘ of our faith that we live, but by the faith OF Jesus.

5. "I am the Vine, ye are the branches: He that abides in

Me, and I in him, the same brings forth much fruit, for without
ME YE CAN DO NOTHING" (John 15:5). According to God‘s Word, what
is it that we can do by our own will? Answer: "NOTHING." It is Christ "IN
him" that brings forth much fruit. Man does not bring forth much fruit by his fabled
free will.

6. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that [‗that

faith‘] not of yourselves [NOT of your own faith or will] it is the gift of
God. Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are HIS
workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which
God has before ordained that we should walk in them"
(Eph. 2:8-10).

Man‘s will is not free. Man has a will, but it is not free from the
causes that make it do what it does.
"For it is God [who? ‗GOD‘] which works in you both TO WILL and
TO DO of His good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13).

According to Christendom, this verse is a fraud. We are taught that, "It is OUR OWN FREE
WILL that works IN us both TO WILL and TO DO of His good pleasure." But no, it is God
Who works in us both to will and TO DO of His good pleasure.


In the book of John 6:36:

"If the Son therefore shall MAKE you free, ye shall be free indeed."

I said that this verse has nothing to do with free will. But it certainly does have to do with
freedom, But freedom from what? From what is it that Jesus frees us? Why free from what
we were in bondage to before He freed us, of course.

"…..Because the creature itself also shall be delivered [freed] from

the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of
God" Rom. 8:20-21.

The whole creation will be delivered from this bondage one day. But until then, only those
destined to become the manifest sons of God receive this deliverance.

Here is the same thought in slightly different words:

"For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me
free [here is this ‗cause and effect‘ thing again] from the law of sin and
death" Rom. 8:2.

No one can "freely" change his will from hating and disobeying God on one day to loving
and obeying God on the next. No, it takes a supernatural miracle from God to accomplish
this. God must personally remove and free [here is the cause] us from being under
the "Law of sin and death" to being under the "Law of the Spirit of life in


Exodus 6:6-8 Wherefore say unto the children of Israel, I am the

LORD, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the
Egyptians, and I will rid you out of their bondage, and I will redeem
you with a stretched out arm, and with great judgments: And I will
take you to me for a people, and I will be to you a God: and ye shall
know that I am the LORD your God, which brought you out from
under the burdens of the Egyptians. And I will bring you in unto the
land, concerning which I did swear to give it to Abraham, to Isaac,
and to Jacob; and I will give it to you for an heritage: I am the LORD.
Not only can we NOT deliver ourselves from sin; we CANNOT even truly repent of
our sins by our own will. This too requires a MIRACLE from God.
Repentance is not predicated upon the "free will" of man, but on the will of God.

We have already cited this verse that we will now examine more closely:
"Or despise you the riches of His goodness and forbearance and
longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to
repentance? Rom. 2:4.

What leads us to repentance? The goodness of our illusionary God -given "free
will" NO, "…the GOODNESS OF GOD…" But can the carnal, natural,
unconverted mind of man appreciate God‘s goodness and then repent by his own
will? No, absolutely not…

This is the one and only time in the whole Bible that the Greek word ago is
translated as "leadeth." If you check Wigram’s Englishman’s Greek Concordance
of the New Testament, you will find that this Greek word ago is translated into much
stronger words than "leadeth." Dozens and dozens of times ago is translated
as bring or brought. The word, in fact, also means to drive. (Remember that
in John 6:44 the Father "draws" [Gk: ‗drags‘] us to Christ?)

Yes, repentance is a process, but it is the goodness of God that does the
actual bringing us to and bringing about of our repentance.


The theory of free will argues that anyone possessing this God -defying power can
freely choose his own course in life by making his own decisions and choices that
are CAUSED by nothing or no one. Every free -willer is said to have the power to do
or not do, to think or not think, anything they wish, without anything causing them to
do contrariwise. So surely Jesus possessed this power as well, did He not?

Here is a blanket statement of Scripture that proves Jesus did no more have a "free
will" than anyone else does:
"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto
you, The Son CAN DO NOTHING OF HIMSELF, but what He sees the
Father do: for what things so ever He does, these also does the Son
likewise" John 5:19.

Do you know of one Scripture that contradicts this verse in John 5:19? If you don‘t
then you must admit that Jesus could not do anything by a supposed "free
will" which is said to have the ability to act independently of God.

God MADE Jesus go through that spiritual battle of His will, but never for a second
was the plan of God in jeopardy! God had clearly prophesied the positive outcome of
this battle hundreds of years before its actual occurrence. And absolutely nothing in
the history of the universe has ever thwarted God‘s plan, purpose or intention.

The Father inspired [caused, made] Jesus state time after time, "Not My
will but Thine, Not My will but Thine, NOT MY WILL BUT THINE"!!

And so the very words that Jesus prayed that night in the garden were the very
words of His Father, and the words of His Father of the purpose for which they were

When there is a conflict between wills regarding the bringing about of that which
pleases God, whose will is it that will always win out? Is it possible for man‘s
will to thwart the will and intention of God? Does man possess such a
God -defying power? Can man with his illusionary free will, will against and contrary
to the predetermined plan and intention of God Almighty? No! No, he can‘t. And yes,
we do have a Scripture on that:
"For it is GOD which works in you both TO WILL and TO DO of
His good pleasure" Phil. 2:13.

When our very own Lord cried out in agony to His Father because His flesh did not
want to go through the crucifixion necessary because of the sin of the world, whose
will prevailed?

"And He said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto you; take
away this cup from Me: nevertheless not what I will, but what YOU
WILL" Mark 14:36-41.

"I can of mine own self DO NOTHING: as I hear, I judge: and my

judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of
the father which has sent Me" John 5:30.

"For I came down from heaven, not to do Mine Own will, but the will
of Him that sent me" John 6:38.

It is hard to even imagine that some will not get this point:
"Jesus said unto them, My meat is TO DO THE WILL OF HIM THAT
SENT ME, and to finish His work" John 4:34.

Jesus didn‘t even speak His own words:

" Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man,
then shall ye know that I am he, and that I DO NOTHING OF
MYSELF: but as My Father has taught Me, I speak these
things" John 8:28. John 12:49.
"Believe you not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The
words that I speak unto you, I speak not of myself, but the Father
that dwells in Me, He does the works" John 14:10.

"He that loves Me not keeps not My sayings: and the word which ye
hear is NOT MINE, but the Father‘s which sent Me" John 14:24.

It is GOD who does the working of the clay. The clay does not determine its
own destiny that is the POTTER‘S job.

"Nay but, O man, who are you that replies against God? Shall the
thing formed [we, the clay] say to Him that formed it [God, the Potter], Why
have You made me thus? Has not the Potter power over the clay [and
the clay‘s powerless imagined ‗free will‘], of the same lump to make one
vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour" Rom. 9:20-21.

It is God Who has always done all the doing, whether physical or spiritual in nature.
"In Whom also we have obtained an
inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose OF HIM
Who works ALL things after the counsel of His OWN will"
(Eph. 1:11).

How spiritually stubborn can we possibly be? I‘ll tell you: As stubborn as God has
predetermined and predestinated and purposed for us to be. But for those few whom
God is calling to salvation by the "foolishness of preaching," let‘s take a closer
look at how things are done according to God.

ALL that we have, we have obtained from God. Not one thing have we obtained by
our own presumed freedom of will. Can we take credit for anything that we have? Is
our own will, independent of God‘s will, responsible for obtaining anything? Answer:

"For who makes you to differ from another, And what have you that
you did not RECEIVE [Gk: „OBTAIN‘]? [from God] now if you did receive
it [from God], why do you glory [Gk: ‗boast‘], AS IF YOU HAD NOT
RECEIVED IT [from God, but rather of your own ‗free‘ will]?" I Cor. 4:7.

Since it is a Scriptural fact and truth that no one ever has received or obtained
anything aside from it being given to him of God, why does all of Christendom boast
of their achievements as though they were not gifts from God straight out of heaven,
but rather the results of their own clever resourcefulness.
"EVERY good gift and EVERY perfect gift is FROM ABOVE, and
comes down FROM THE FATHER OF LIGHTS, with Whom is no
variableness, neither shadow of turning [in other words of Scripture:
‗I CHANGE NOT…‘]" James 1:17.

"O Lord, I know that the way of man is NOT IN HIMSELF [not in his will
or choice] it is not in man that walks to direct his steps [he is not ‗free‘ to
choice where he will walk]" Jer. 10:23. READ (Prov. 16:1).

I have the next topic as a full separate letter but I will still have to add it to this lake of
fire series to make it complete. So those of you that have already studied it, don‘t
have to read GOD THE CREATOR OF EVIL, just jump to the next chapter.


―That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west,
that there is none beside Me. I am the Lord, and there is none else. I
form the light, and create darkness: I made peace [good], and create
evil: I the Lord do all these things‖ (Isa. 45:6-7).

Notice that God did not create light to shine IN the darkness. No,
God ―created‖ darkness, itself. Darkness is not just the absence of light. Darkness
was created by God. It does not ―naturally‖ exist independent of His creating it. This,
like everything else in the Bible, is a parable. Mankind is spiritually in ―darkness.‖
And it is a very painful thing to come out.

―For God, Who commanded the light to shine out of darkness [not ‗in‘
darkness], has shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge
of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. But we have this
treasure in earthen vessels that the Excellency of the power may be
of God, and not of us.‖ (II Cor. 4:6).

Before we go further, it is necessary for those who have never seen it proven, that it
is God Who is the Creator, User, and ultimately, the Destroyer of evil.

Most Christians say that the word ―evil‖ in this verse should be
translated ―calamity.‖ That is decidedly a fabricated assertion. Would the
Christmas tsunami in Indonesia or the earthquake in Haiti have wreaked less havoc
had it been a ―calamity‖ rather than an ―evil?‖ What would be gained by
calling ―evils‖ by the name ―calamities‖?

Nevertheless, let it be known that the word translated ―evil‖ in Isaiah 45:7 is the
Hebrew word ra. The Hebrew word for ―calamity‖ is the Hebrew word ade which
means ―misfortune, misery, or ruin. Whereas the Hebrew
word ra means ―bad or evil‖ It is the same word used for the ―tree of the
knowledge of good and evil, ra.‖ It was not the tree of the knowledge
of ―good and calamity.‖ Did Jacob really mean to
say, ―a calamitous beast‖ had devoured his son? (Gen. 37:33) Did Israel
really ―do calamity in the sight of God‖ by worshipping Balaam, or did they
do evil? (Jude. 3:7)?

The Hebrew ra means ―bad or evil‖ and it is used over four hundred times to
represent bad or evil, not calamity. WAKE UP CHRISTIANS!
God created ra—EVIL. Furthermore God used evil and continues to use evil
against His creatures all day long.


This is all the strange work of God. There is no free will about it. We are all born out
of a dark womb into the natural light of day, but this too is but a parable. We must
be ―born again‖ out of spiritual darkness of this age into the glorious light of the
Sun of God. It is a painful journey, and requires an experience of evil to accomplish.

―And I gave my heart to seek and search out by wisdom concerning

all things that are done under heaven: this sore travail has God
given to the sons of man to be exercised therewith‖
Ecclesiastes 1:13.

What a horrible translation! My King James has three superior numbers in this one
verse indicating three different words in the margin. Especially the last phrase:
―…this sore travail has God given to the sons of man to be exercised

What pray tell does that mean? One of the most all -encompassing and profound
verses in all Scripture, and most translations butcher it beyond understanding.

NEW AMERICAN BIBLE: ―A thankless task God has appointed for

men to be busied about.‖

JEWISH PUBLICATION SOCIETY: ―…it is a sore task that God has

given to the sons of man to be exercised therewith.‖

NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION: ―What a heavy burden God has laid

on men!‖

YOUNG‘S LITERAL TRANSLATION: ―It is a sad travail God has given

to the son of man to be humbled by it.‖
This is really an important verse; we have got to get it right. Young‘s
Translation gets a little closer to the truth than the KJV or the previous three
references. He got the humbled part right. But what is all this ―sad travail,‖
―heavy burden,‖ ―thankless task,‖ business all about? It is not that difficult if
we will just look at the Hebrew words:

Eccl. 1:13 from the King James:

First, the word ―this‖ may be better translated ―it,‖ as some have done.
But far, far more important than all, the word ―sore‖ should be
translated ―EVIL‖ as almost none have done. It is the Hebrew word ra which
always means ―EVIL,‖ and is translated as ―evil‖ in hundreds and hundreds of
other verses. Why not in this verse? The few times that ra is translated ―sore‖ in
the KJV; it ALWAYS means ―evil‖ as in ―evil sickness‖ or ―evil
troubles.‖ SO WHYSORE NOW??

The word ―travail‖ in the KJV is not out of line with the Hebrew, but is nebulous
and not easily understood by most. It would better translated
as ―employment‖ or ―experience.‖

And we have already seen from other versions that the KJV ―exercised‖ is better
translated ―humbled‖ as Young‘s and Concordant has done.

Here then is a proper translation of this most profound verse:

―It is an experience of evil Elohim [God] has given to the sons of
humanity to humble them by it‖ (Concordant Old Testament).
Now we can easily understand what is being said in this verse.

This ―experience of evil‖ is not the purpose or goal of human existence, but this
is indeed the process by which God is bringing His Sons and Daughters into glory!
Most translations have hidden the meaning of this verse of Scripture. The translators
just couldn‘t believe that God would do such a thing. They see it all around them.
They see it in thousands of Scriptures, but they just couldn‘t bring themselves to
come right out and say it, as God obviously has stated in the original Hebrew of this

―It is an EXPERIENCE of EVIL that God has given to the sons of

humanity to HUMBLE them by it.‖

And to this agrees the rest of Scripture:

―For ALL his days are SORROWS, and his

travail [experience] GRIEF…‖ (Eccl. 2:23).
The destiny of the human race is indeed GLORIOUS, but the journey is filled with
evil and sorrow. This is not to say that there are not many beautiful and good things
in life, but for most the misery far far outweighs the pleasurable.

All of such things are examples of evil. God created evil for a purpose. So naturally
He will not make evil inoperative at every turn in the road or there would have been
no purpose in creating it in the first place.

Evil serves many noble purposes. One of which is a back drop for good. Good
cannot be understood or certainly not appreciated without a backdrop of evil. Evil
makes good appear even better and is certainly much more appreciated.

Evil is necessary for the production or development of good. You cannot name one
virtue that is not in some way produced by the resistance to some form of evil.

All knowledge is matter of contrast and relativity. One cannot know what light is
unless he has been acquainted with darkness. One has no conception of large
unless he also knows of things that are small. Up is only up in relation to down. Life
is the opposite of death, etc. To understand and fully appreciate all of these things,
there are many necessary experiences to go through. God creates and puts us
through these many things in the development of godly character.

All of these evils can be likened to the creation of a beautiful building. Ugly
scaffolding is necessary in the construction of this building. It is ugly and serves no
purpose other than in the actual construction of the building. When the building is
completed, the scaffolding is torn down and discarded. It serves no further purpose.
All evil will be discarded one day. And the last enemy, DEATH, will likewise be
ABOLISHED FOR EVER (I Cor. 15:26) and God will "ALL in All"!!!


Who was responsible for Job‘s trial? Was it Satan, Job OR God?
Are ―calamities‖ better than ―evils?‖ Can Satan operate independently of God?
Does God use evil for good? Is it a sin to hold God responsible for all the evil in the

Job was a man who feared God and eschewed [shunned] evil. God gave Satan
authority to test Job. God set the guidelines. Satan caused all of Job‘s oxen, sheep
and camels to be stolen, and his servants to be killed. He also caused a house to
collapse in a wind and kill all the young men and Job‘s sons and daughters. Satan
then covered Job with painful boils.

Would anyone suggest that these trials that came to Job were not ―evil?‖ Well here
is what Job called them:

―But Job answered and said, O that my griefs were thoroughly

weighed, and my calamity laid in the balances together!‖ Job 6:1-2.
Calamity is the proper translation in this verse. Now then, does the argument
(which is totally untrue) that God created ―calamity‖ in Isa. 45:7 rather
than ―evil‖ carry any weight whatsoever in any practical way. No,
Job‘s ―calamity‖ was very evil.

Who was responsible for these evils and calamity that came upon Job? Satan, right?
Wrong. Satan was merely the club in God‘s hand. Notice what Job was inspired to

―And said, Naked came I out of my mother‘s womb, and naked shall
I return thither: the Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away (It was
―The Lord‖ Who took away all of Job‘s possessions and his family. Satan was merely the
club in God‘s hand.)

Blessed be the name of the Lord. In all this Job sinned NOT, nor
charged God foolishly [with wrong]‖ Job 1:21-22.

Job had no ―free will‖ in any of this. God was in total control and God was
responsible for all that happened. God caused Job‘s uprightness; God caused Job‘s
downfall; God caused Job‘s restoration and blessing.

―Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no
GOD‖ (Rom. 13:1).

And so we have read that God used Satan to try, and test Job, He used Satan to try,
and test Jesus, He uses Satan to try, and test believers, and He also uses Satan to
try, and test THE WHOLE WORLD:

God does not ―allow‖ Satan to do ANYTHING. Satan was created by God to do
exactly what God wants him to do—nothing more and nothing less.

Satan is an intricate (complex) and necessary creation of God to accomplish His

awesome purpose and goal for the human race. When God desires something, HE
CREATES IT. God desired an ―adversary,‖ an ―enemy,‖ but there is no natural
adversary or enemy of God:

―But as we were allowed [Gk: ‗approved‘] of God to be put in trust with

the gospel…‖ I Thess. 2:4.
That‘s it! That is the totality of everything in the Bible that God ―allows.‖

―You shall be visited of the LORD of hosts with thunder, and

with earthquake…‖ Isa. 29:6. Is this our free will???

―And, behold, there was a great earthquake for the angel of the Lord
descended from heaven…‖ Matt. 28:2. Etcetera,
After each category of evil that I will scripturally prove comes from God, we need to
ask ourselves, ―Does God ‗allow‘ all of these things, or does God create, cause,
and bring these evils upon humanity?‖ God does not ―allow‖ earthquakes, but
rather He causes and brings earthquakes:

Sounds pretty much like what God did in the Indian Ocean to destroy the coastal
regions of Indonesia, doesn‘t it? Theologians refuse to believe that God would
purposefully CAUSE the Christmas tsunami or the earthquake in HAITI. They don‘t
know what they talking about.

―And, Behold! I [GOD] even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the

earth, to destroy all flesh, where in is the breath of life, from under
heaven; and everything that is in the earth shall die‖ Gen. 6:17.

―The LORD shall smite you with a consumption, and with a fever,
and with an inflammation, and with an extreme burning, and with
the sword, and with blasting, and with mildew; and they shall
pursue you until you perish‖ Deut. 28:22.


―The LORD makes poor…‖ I Sam. 2:7.

―The rich and poor meet together: the Lord is the maker of all‖
Prov. 22:2.


Let‘s take a close look at that last Scripture in our list:

―…shall there be evil [Heb: ra—„bad, evil‟] in a city, and the Lord has
not done it? Amos 3:6.

There‘s the question; what‘s the answer? The answer from all Christendom is ―Yes.‖
―Yes‖ there shall be all kinds of evil in a city, and the Lord has not done it. In fact,
according to their teaching, the Lord does no evil in any city, ever. World famous
Teachers/Preachers/Theologians/Authors always says that GOD DID NOT CREATE
EVIL. But what saith the Scriptures Amos 3:4-6 and Isaiah 45:7.


God Almighty is responsible for everything and He brings about everything only at its
precise "APPOINTED SEASON AND TIME." Let's read it:
"To everything there is a season and a time to every purpose under
the heaven" Eccl. 3:1.
The implications of this verse are staggering. The very foundation of human
psychology and theology crumbles under the weight of this declaration of God‘s
Word. This is undoubtedly one of the ten most profound Scriptures in the entire

If we are to be honest and believe this verse, then we must concede that absolutely
NOTHING is left out God‘s profound declaration except man‘s anti-scriptural theory
of "free will."

The word "season" in the KJV is translated from the Hebrew word ―z[e]man‖, and
is defined in Strong‘s Hebrew Dictionary as: "APPOINTED season, occasion and
definite time." And "purpose" which is translated from the Hebrew
word ―chephets‖ is defined as: "pleasure, desire and matter." Sometimes rendered
as "purpose" or "event"

Here‘s a second witness to this grand declaration:

"Because to every purpose [matter or event] there is time and
judgment..." Eccl. 8:6.

And a third witness:

"…for there is a time there for every purpose and for every
work" Eccl. 3:17.

Here are a couple translations that make this verse a little clearer:

"...for He has appointed a time for every matter and for every
work..." The New Revised Standard Version.

"For He has set a season for every event and for every deed..."
The Concordant Literal Old Testament.

There is no wasted motion in God's creation, purpose and plan. Everything has an
appointed time, and everything includes: "every purpose, every work, every
matter, every event, and every deed." Where pray tell does "free will" fit
into all this? It doesn‘t. It clearly DOESN‘T. Man has no free will. There is no such
thing as free will. Again we ask, since "EVERY work, purpose, matter,
deed and event" under heaven must happen at an "APPOINTED TIME," how
can there be such a thing as human, uncaused, "free-will?"
[1] "To everything there is a season [appointed time], and a time to
every purpose [matter or event] under the heaven" Eccl. 3:1.


[2] "I know that, whatsoever God does...NOTHING can be put to it,
nor ANYTHING taken from it: and GOD does it" Eccl. 3:14.

Someone might see a contradiction in God‘s teaching. If the two above Scriptures
are true, then why does God warn against "adding to or taking away from His word?"
Well, like everything else that is beyond the realm of carnal comprehension, all of
these things too, have been foreordained and pre-determined to happen only at
their "APPOINTED TIME." God has appointed a time for false prophets to add
and God has appointed a time for false prophets to take away from His word.

"For OF HIM, and THROUGH HIM, and TO HIM, are ALL

THINGS..." Rom. 11:36.

Is there any real difference in saying that God "gives life" or that God "causes a
baby to be born?" Is there any real difference in saying that God "takes away
life" or that God "causes us to die?" When it comes to death, we prefer
euphemisms (less offensive synonyms). We don't like to hear that "our Mother is
DEAD!" We prefer to say that "Mother passed away." We don't want to be so
honest or brutal as to say "God KILLED my son" but rather "God took my
son." But the use of mellower -sounding euphemisms does not negate the fact that
God appointed a time for us to be BORN, and He also has appointed a time when
we must DIE.

Our will cannot change any of God‘s "appointed events" or His "appointed
times" in which each event must occur. You might think that you can. You might
suggest that you will commit suicide and shorten your life. How silly—how totally
unscriptural. No one can commit suicide unless and until the "appointed
time" that God has foreordained that you commit suicide, if indeed God has
ordained such a thing for you.

"There is no man that has power over the spirit to retain the spirit;
neither has he power in [Heb: authority over‘] the day of death..."
Eccl. 8:8.

Is this verse too difficult for anyone to understand? The Scriptures are clear: WAKE

"Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit
shall return unto God who gave it" Eccl. 12:7.
But there‘s more:
"Behold that which I have seen: it is good and comely for one to eat
and to drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labour that he takes
under the sun all the days of his life, which God gives him: for it is
his portion." Eccl. 5:18.

This is not exactly what the Hebrew manuscripts say. Here is what it should
read: "...during the NUMBER of days in his life…" The word for "all" as in
"all the days of his life," is the Hebrew word, mispar, and its first definition
is "NUMBER." Man‘s days are "NUMBERED." And God only knows the number.

Here‘s another one:

"Seeing his days are determined, the number of his months is with
Thee, You have appointed his bounds that he cannot pass" Job 14:5.

The word "determined" comes from the Hebrew charats and means "to point
sharply." Here we are told that man‘s "months" are determined to a precise sharp
point in time. There will be no variation in time as to when we must die.

Not only is our precise time of death appointed, but also our resurrection:
"If a man dies, shall he live again? All the days of my APPOINTED
TIME will I wait [in the grave] till my change [resurrection] come"
Job 14:14.

Okay then, Does God say that He, "does according to HIS WILL …among
the inhabitants of the earth..." Dan. 4:35?

But can‘t the "free will/choice" of mankind stay or refrain God‘s hand from
accomplishing what He desires?

"My counsel shall stand, and I WILL DO ALL My pleasure.

I have spoken it; I WILL also bring it to pass.
I have purposed it, I WILL also do it" (Isaiah 46:10-11).

Man cannot change the plans and the will of GOD, don‘t even dare, we need to
study the scriptures properly.
Mis-translations and mis-interpretations

This article is being written on behalf of all the ministries and people that defend
the faith with the truth and are accused of judging because they test those who
teach falsely with the Word of God.

The premise-Does God tell us NOT to judge?

The Bible’s answer -No He does not.

John 7:24 Jesus says: "Do not judge according to appearance, but
judge righteous judgment."

What Jesus does tell us is not to judge by our own opinions, but instead judge by
the word of God, that is what it means to judge righteously. He always
encouraged the people to judge. God told Israel to judge the prophets in the Old
Testament. He had the true prophets judge the false but the people reacted saying
the very same things people are saying today. Your being negative oh you never have
anything good to say.

In the New Testament we are told to judge prophecy, to discern, to test the spirits
and we are told to test ALL things. We are told to do this because it helps keep us
away from what is false and evil. The apostle Paul showed us how to judge so there
would be no second guesswork. The apostle Paul said, "If anyone preaches
another gospel let him be accursed" Would anyone say to Paul's face "you're

In 2 Thess. 3:14-15
"And if anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that person
and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed. YET DO
NOT COUNT HIM AS AN ENEMY, but admonish him as a brother."

Strong guidelines that many avoid to do today. These are done not to condemn but
to bring repentance and restoration.

I realize that when one's favourite teacher or leader is questioned the initial
human response can be one of agitation and turn to over emotionalism. But when
feelings do not subside and escalate into anger, rage, and maliciousness, it is not
godly at all. Despite that they believe they have a cause to protect their teacher, it
is not advantageous for anyone to have their emotions rule if they are
trying to arrive at the truth.

There has been a trend going on for a number of years that has dulled the
spiritual senses of the church and leavened the convictions of many a Christian.
It has risen to new heights as of late where if anyone has anything to say about
another they are told, "Don't judge, "touch not my anointed"
"do my prophets no harm" etc.

Maybe if some of the people that quote these verses would look at what they
actually say "in context," they wouldn't have such flawed arguments, they would not
find themselves becoming entangled emotionally. It's not just finding a few words
to prove a position, but what do they mean in the Scripture in its context and can
they apply to us today.

What is ironic is that to tell people they are judgmental is to judge them. What
people are doing is recommending for us not to judge by the word of God, but
dispense with any discernment, just like they do it. Some even threaten and curse
those who test because they cannot deal with the Scriptural proof presented to
them. Christians are not to threaten or curse others because they
disagree. Neither should they be warning that they are going to prayer,
as though God will answer their prayer of vengeance and avenge the
persons teaching that was examined and found false. The facts more
often than not are; those who say not to judge are incredibly more judgmental than
those they accuse of judging.

Now we can never discuss doctrine and peoples teachings. This means they too
cannot discuss anything that they think, even if it is beneficial!

But Heb.6:1-3 tells us we can discuss doctrine. "Therefore, leaving the

discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to
perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead
works and of faith toward God, the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of
hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this
we will do if God permits."

In other words many of these things should be settled, but there are many things
that are not.

What I have found is very little challenge back, quoting from the Bible to prove
their position. Rarely do they say this person does not teach this or you
misunderstood, he really means this. What they argue is just don't test it, or don't
say this because I know such and such for years and they are doing great things for
God. That's judging isn't it? And it is done by appearance.

Then when this does not work they will respond by calling names and threatening
people using Bible cliché's as "don't judge" "don't touch God's anointed," "do
my prophets no harm," etc., all taken out of context. If they were to think
biblically they would realize we are all anointed, not just some, and to come
against another brother or sister that is trying to obey Scripture means they too
are coming against God's anointed. Everyone in the body of Christ is
anointed; nonetheless what someone teaches is to be tested. How do we know
this? Paul commended the Thessalonians for doing so, even when it was Paul himself
that was being examined by Scripture (Acts 17:11).That is a right Spirit.

So many have been indoctrinated into the constraint of don't say anything against
another no matter how far off they are. Let God will deal with them. If this were
true, then why are we given all the commands in Scripture to judge? Why all the
warnings that deception and falsehood will permeate the Church in the end and we
are to be on guard? We are told to deal with it and not allow it to continue. It's not
to say that we make mountains out of molehills, but some are already mountains
that need to be moved. So let's speak to the mountain, speak to those who
congregate at the foot of it and tell them.

We should take note, we all judge things all day: let me give some examples. When
you sit down you make sure you're comfortable, you're judging whether or not you
are comfortable. When you eat food at restaurant you judge whether it taste good
or bad, and you judge the service you were given. When you bring your car to a
mechanic you look for a good one and then you judge if he did a good job. When you
buy a product you make sure it works as advertised. When you receive bills in the
mail you judge whether they were recorded right. Even in conversations you judge
whether someone is telling the truth. So we judge not only every day, but
throughout the day.

You can't help but judge! All these things mentioned do not necessarily have an
effect on your spiritual life. But the things that actually can affect your spiritual
life people are saying, "Don't judge." If ever a lie of the Devil was told this was it.
When the Devil tempted Eve he hoped that she would not judge what he was saying
with what God had already spoke. During the conversation (Gen.3) she began to
challenge him by the word of God but he responded by bringing doubt on God's
word, saying "has God said?" By the time he was finished she believed the Devil
over what God said. She didn't judge, and instead she and Adam were judged!

What Has God said?

Jethro gave advice after seeing Moses was going to be burnt out on ruling. Moses
responded in Deut. 1:15-18 "So I took the heads of your tribes, wise and
knowledgeable men, and made them heads over you, leaders of
thousands, leaders of hundreds, leaders of fifties, leaders of tens, and
officers for your tribes." Then I commanded your judges at that time,
saying, 'Hear the cases between your brethren, and judge righteously
between a man and his brother or the stranger who is with him. 'You
shall not show partiality in judgment; you shall hear the small as well
as the great; you shall not be afraid in any man's presence, for the
judgment is God's. The case that is too hard for you, bring to me, and I
will hear it.' "And I commanded you at that time all the things which
you should do."
This was the law to Israel and a principle of how they were to live. So they were to
judge even the menial matters among themselves. This is made clearer in the New
Testament about doctrine.

This is again repeated in Deut.16:18-19

"You shall appoint judges and officers in all your gates, which the
LORD your God gives you, according to your tribes, and they shall judge
the people with just judgment." 19You shall not pervert justice; you
shall not show partiality, nor take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of
the wise and twists the words of the righteous."

Why are some of the most drastic things said by famous people ignored, these
scriptures show that it is because people are partial, loyal to the renowned, not
caring if they are wrong or right. A bribe can be money or it can be other things
such as promises or blessings that will be lost.

The outcome is that it twists the words of the righteous when they are
manipulated not to say the truth.

Judges 2:18-19
not cease from their own doings nor from their stubborn way." "And
when the LORD raised up judges for them, the LORD was with the
judge and delivered them out of the hand of their enemies all the days
of the judge; for the LORD was moved to pity by their groaning because
of those who oppressed them and harassed them. And it came to pass,
when the judge was dead, that they reverted and behaved more
corruptly than their fathers, by following other gods, to serve them and
bow down to them. They did.

The judges were to implement the commands from the word. Notice
what happens when there is no judgment to decide what is right or
wrong; the people do what they feel like and reap the consequences.

The end of the book of judges tells us what happened; every man did
what was right in their own eyes.
(Judges 17:6, 21:25).
The judges were restored under Jehoshaphat king of Judah.

2 Chron.19:4-7:
"So Jehoshaphat dwelt at Jerusalem; and he went out again among the
people from Beersheba to the mountains of Ephraim, and brought them
back to the LORD God of their fathers. Then he set judges in the land
throughout all the fortified cities of Judah, city by city, and said to the
judges, "Take heed to what you are doing, for you do not judge for man
but for the LORD, who is with you in the judgment." Now therefore, let
the fear of the LORD be upon you; take care and do it, for there is no
iniquity with the LORD our God, no partiality, nor taking of bribes."

For even Asaph said in

Ps. 82:1-4
"God stands in the congregation of the mighty; he judges among the
gods. How long will you judge unjustly, and show partiality to the
wicked? Selah "Defend the poor and fatherless; do justice to the
afflicted and needy. Deliver the poor and needy; free them from the
hand of the wicked."

People are defenceless from the wicked when they put aside judgment. Today there
are many people that are abused by those who Lord it over them, by manipulation,
by teachings and promises that never come true. If you have a heart of compassion
you cannot just sit idly by while this takes place, even to those you may not know
personally. It is being done to the body of Christ and the body of Christ needs to
say something.

What Did Jesus Actually Say On Judging?

Protectors of false teachers will say Jesus said, "Not to Judge,"

quoting Matthew 7:1, therefore that we cannot "judge." At first glance it
appears that Jesus does forbid judging, but let's continue to read the passage.

Matthew 7:1-5: "Judge not, that you be not judged." For with what
judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use,
it will be measured back to you." And why do you look at the speck in
your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?" Or
how can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove the speck from your
eye'; and look, a plank is in your own eye?" Hypocrite! First remove the
plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the
speck out of your brother's eye."

In other words you can judge as along as you are not doing the same thing. If you
want to help another and have taken care of yourself in this area, then you are able
to see and operate on your brother. Jesus does not say don't operate under any
circumstances, but allows us to remove the speck when we can see. But Jesus goes
on and says in
V: 6: "Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before
swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in

What He is saying is that we need to make sure whom we are engaged with. When
you try to correct someone with the Holy Word and they are haters of truth they
will not receive the pearls and will turn on you. So we are to weigh out whom we give
the Word of God out to.

Christ kept this theme throughout His ministry rebuking the people in
Luke 12:55-57
"And when you see the south wind blow, you say, 'There will be hot
weather'; and there is." Hypocrites! You can discern the face of the sky
and of the earth, but how is it you do not discern this time? "Yes, and
why, even of yourselves, do you not judge what is right?"

This was said right after Jesus lectured on His coming, how it would bring division,
not unity (Luke 12:56-57).

Jesus also said "Beware of false prophets!" (Matthew 7:15) this is a warning
but comes as a command from our Lord. But how could we "beware" of "false
prophets" unless we test what they say? Instead of obeying what Jesus said,
some actually ignore this and support them. How? By saying, "don't test it,"
"don't touch God's anointed." Nonsense! Who are they? They do this
because they have been taught "by them" not to question them. Loyalty and
respect are good qualities but we cannot fall into the trap that because so and so
was in ministry for 20-40 years or we know them personally that they can't say
something terribly wrong.

True men of God are willing to be corrected from the Word, no matter who spoke a
certain teaching or prophecy.

"Ye shall know them by their fruits," Christ said (Matthew 7:16).

In judging their "fruits," we must judge by God's Word. So what is fruit? Well to
understand fruit we need to take a few steps backwards. The seed is the word of
God, it is what gives us the new life. As it grows in us we mature until we become
like a tree:

(Psalm 1), for a tree bears fruit.

Christ is using a natural example of a spiritual principle-- a mature tree
bear's fruit. If the seed is the word, then the tree and the roots of the
tree must be of the word. So a good tree bears good fruit. The fruit
can't be good if it is not based on the word, in other words they need to
have correct doctrine and teach right to have good fruit. This does not
mean one is right on everything but they will hold to the core teachings
and are consistent in these. They will not say one thing one time, and
contradict themselves another time.

In the New Testament this statement sums up what Jesus meant on judging.

In John 7:24 says: "Do not judge according to appearance, but judge
righteous judgment."

Jesus is saying we can "judge" only do it correctly, not by what you see or hear
but by the Word of truth. Just because you don't want to judge does not mean you
have the right to tell others not to. To accuse others of doing what the Bible tells
us to do-- is to judge without a righteous judgment.

Jesus said in John 5:30 "I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge; and
My judgment is righteous, because I do not seek My own will but the
will of the Father who sent Me."

To seek God's will in a matter is to go to Scripture to see what he says on

something. Jesus had perfect judgment because he heard from the Father. He also
delivered this word to us and says it is not only His Word but the
Father’s (Jn.14:24). So if the Word of God is used correctly it is not you or I
judging but God, therefore it becomes a righteous judgment.

Jesus again made it clear how to judge unrighteously

"You judge according to the flesh; I judge no one. "And yet if I do judge,
my judgment is true; for I am not alone, but I am with the Father who
sent me" (John 8:15-16).

Jesus did not judge by appearances, He was able to know the heart. While we do
not have the same ability, He has given us directions on how we can judge and be
accurate in it. A crooked stick by itself may not show that it is bent, but
it will always be seen as crooked when laid next to the straight stick of
the word.
Paul wrote in Phil. 3:15-17 "Therefore let us, as many as are mature, have
this mind; and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal even
this to you. Nevertheless, to the degree that we have already
attained, let us walk by the same rule let us be of the same mind.
Brethren, join in following my example, and note those who so walk, as
you have us for a pattern."

Paul used himself and the other apostles as our physical examples in everything.
Paul could not deal individually with the many false teachers springing up like weeds
in the different areas. Paul said to follow his example as he followed Christ. Christ
openly showed what is false, so did Paul, and so did the other apostles. Much of the
New Testament was written to publicly to correct false teaching within the Church

Every second epistle written by an Apostle is for correction or judging false


In 2 Timothy 4:10, Paul judges and warns about a man named Demas. Later in the
same epistle (2:17) he warns of the heresies of two others naming them. Paul did a
lot of judging and warning when it came to false teachers that could influence the
church, because he cared.

What if Paul didn't judge and allowed Alexander to continue teaching, what if Peter
let Simon Magus stay in the Church? Think it through!

We also have permission to judge false doctrine, and those who really care do so.

What about love?

John the Baptist called both the Pharisees and Sadducees "a generation of
Vipers" (Matt. 3:7), he rebuked Herod the king. Today, he would be accused of
being unloving, unkind, no respect for leaders and most of all un-Christian. Jesus
and Paul would also be accused of being judgmental if one would examine what they
actually said.

I believe God has been training the Church to recognize error and deception
because the real deception that could deceive the elect may be just around the
corner. If you can't judge today's falsehood you will certainly be unable to
tomorrow when things escalate. Is it now unloving to stop someone from going over
cliff when you already know where the road ends.

How else do you protect the sheep if you do not speak out? Let me give a simple
example: If someone is selling a false product in your city and numerous people are
buying it and becoming sick. What would you do? What if you tried to go to the
manufacturer but he would not meet with you because he is an important man in the
community and you are not? Do you keep silent and just let it go or is it your duty
to let others know?

James says, not to do something you know is right is sin .

So you are sinning if you have any idea it could be wrong. Here in lies the problem,
the people who say don't judge do this for protection of their teachers. But they
will often admit that they know there are things wrong, but they have not come to
the conclusion of how wrong it is.

The Apostle Paul also writes: "And this I pray, that your love may abound
yet more and more in knowledge and in all discernment (judgment) that
you may approve things that are excellent in God's sight."

It is this same love that he applies to

Eph. 4:14-15
"that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried
about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the
cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love,
may grow up in all things into Him who is the head- Christ"

This truth would be the word that would challenge the words from deceivers who
are deceived and affecting the body with "winds of doctrine."

We are to identify certain people for the brethren's own safety. We are
to identify false teachers for the purpose of protecting the sheep in
Christ's Church, and we certainly don't need to apologize for this. We
are our brothers keeper. This love is a discriminating love, a love that
cares enough for others and is not concerned with what people think of
you, especially when you know that you are right from the Word .

Hanging with people who teach falsely will rub off on you, the cliché for self
protection "touch not my anointed" becomes "let it be," it is grinded into the
followers and moaned by them toward those who have anything to say about their
favourite teachers. One needs to hear both sides before they can make a just
decision. Find the proof that what they teach is from the Bible and not from their
own imagination of what they think the Bible says.

Lets look at what those who say not to judge are actually saying the Word of God
states, next to what the Word of God actually says.

Those who say "DON'T JUDGE"- 1 Thess. 5:21-22 "Don't Test all things;
hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil."


The BIBLE-1Thess. 5:21-22 "Test all things; hold fast what is good.
Abstain from every form of evil."

Is it evil to test-NO it is not! We are told to test ALL things, not just pick and
choose what and when to test. Now this does not mean we become the judge and
jury or walk around with a critical eye on everything. It means we are to be sober
and vigilant and not take for granted that everything said is the Gospel.


Those who say "Don't judge- I John 4:1-3 "Beloved, do believe every
spirit, don't test the spirits, whether they are of God"


The BIBLE- I John 4:1-3

"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they
are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that
Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does
not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And
this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming,
and is now already in the world."

"Do my prophets no harm." Meant not to lay hands on them.

False prophets were to be rejected and stoned in the Old
Testament (Deut.18:20). Instead, Israel killed the true prophets (Mt.23:35-37).
No one is laying hands on anyone today. The Bible tells us to judge prophets.

1 Cor. 14:29
"Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge."

It does not just say let only the other prophets judge, but the "others." These
others may have the gift of prophecy or those gifted in the word and Spirit. This
would also relate to 1 Cor.12:10 which tells us one of the gifts of the Spirit is a
discerning of spirits. (judging, determining what is from God or not). Exactly what
John writes in:
I John 4:1-3
"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they
are of God"

Here again we are told to judge, and in this case it could mean the whole
congregation. The "discerning of spirits" is probably the most needed gift in the
end times where Jesus said many false prophets and teachers would be around us.

When there is a need God raises up a standard. As Paul continues to write "the
spirit of the prophets are subject to the prophets." This does not mean we
turn over a meeting to false prophets to validate the prior false prophets that

Today we have a repetition of the error of the people in Jeremiah's time: "An
astonishing and horrible thing has been committed in the land: The
prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests rule by their own power; and
My people love to have it so. But what will you do in the end?"
(Jer. 5:30-31) He asks a question that we need to answer today. What will you do?

No person is to be prevented from the right of investigating and comparing with

the Bible what is said. Who would desire to prohibit the people from a full and free
examination of what is said? Certainly it would not be God who tells us to judge in
the Word. The guideline of testing and judging stresses the importance of truth
being accepted and error being rejected. It gives accountability for what one says
as a teacher to many people, this reduces the margin of error spread to the people.

Believers are not to avoid judging, just avoid judging with a final
condemnation (That Only Belongs To God). This word judge (Greek-
krino) is used over 80 times in the New Testament and it means to call in question,
discern, conclude, decree, and determine. The meaning does not mean to
condemn in judgment; the context shows we are responsible to correctly
evaluate a thing or an act. It does not mean to glean the truth and ignore the false
because their good outweighs the bad. We cannot always judge someone's motives,
only God has this kind ability. We are commanded to judge what they spoke, their

God is the ultimate judge on eternal life but we the church are to be keepers of
the truth, to do this one must test what is said and reject falsehood.
Heb. 5:12-14
"For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone
to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you
have come to need milk and not solid food. For everyone who partakes
only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe.
But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who
by reason of use have their senses exercised to
discern both good and evil."

The author tells us that believers who are "mature," are those who have trained
themselves to exercise judgment, to discern between good and evil through the
Word, not by feelings. That is judging; those who do not judge are babes in
the word. One of the ways to show you are spiritually mature is to seek out a
matter on its own without being persuaded by public opinions or the status of a
person. People today often trust a person's position or fame more than the Holy
Spirits discernment given in the Word.

Error can only be seen as error only when it is measured against the
truth. This means judging. If you accept anything everyone says because
of who they are you are just a sponge that will soak up both the good
and the bad equally. Then the only way we can get rid of the bad is for God to
wring it out of you. That is not always a pleasant experience.

When we ignore the false we are helping the devil's cause because the
truth becomes hidden. The Devil hates the truth because it exposes
anything that is false: sometimes it is well hidden.

Jesus warned us that false prophets and false disciples would arise and He told us
how to know the difference. When somebody says that you are judging,
they are wrong, we are inspecting the fruit that comes from the tree
and we are told to do so. When we decide what someone is teaching is
wrong by the Word, that is not our judgment but God's. But if we decide
simply by loyalty and allegiance this does not prove it is true and it becomes what
Jesus called judging by appearance.

Proverbs tells us to hear both sides of a matter before we make a decision.

When sheep follow sheep instead of the shepherd they will reap the consequences.
It's well known that sheep are some of the dumbest animals on God's green earth,
you and I both are not as smart as we think we are.

Peter quotes Isa.53

"For you were like sheep going astray, but have now returned to the
Shepherd and Overseer of your souls (1 Pet. 2:25).
Matt. 9:36
"But when he (Jesus) saw the multitudes, he was moved with
compassion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered
abroad, as sheep having no shepherd."

Jesus said: "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow
Me"(John 10:26-27).

What we are not to judge?

These are just a few things to think about. Col 2:16

"So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a
new moon or Sabbaths."

Rom 14:10-15
"But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for
your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
For it is written: "As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me,
and every tongue shall confess to God."
So then each of us shall give account of himself to God.
Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve
this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother's
I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing
unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to
him it is unclean. Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food,
you are no longer walking in love. Do not destroy with your food the
one for whom Christ died."

The point Paul is making is not to stumble a brother or sister by your freedom from
the Old Testament law. But to allow false teaching to freely take place would be to
stumble them.


Those who do not judge teaching are actually disobeying what the Bible tells us to

2 John 10-11:
"If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him
not into your house, neither bid him God speed. For he that biddeth
him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds."
Paul writes to Titus about the insubordinate, idle talkers and deceivers

"Wherefore rebuke them sharply that they may be sound in the

faith" (Titus 1:9, 13).

Jesus commended those who judged to arrive at the truth,

"I know that you cannot tolerate wicked men, that you have tested
those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false"
(Revelation 2:2).

All the apostles approved judging those who claimed leadership positions.

Paul wrote to Timothy who was new to the ministry:

"I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will
judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom: Preach
the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke,
exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. For the time will come
when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own
desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for
themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth ,
and be turned aside to fables. But you be watchful in all things, endure
afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfil your ministry."
(2 Tim. 4:1-5).

What afflictions is he talking about? Those who came against Timothy in doing
things that are required of God. What things? Convincing, rebuking, and exhorting
those who have turned from the truth, God's word... If you are one who has
learned to discern truth from error, continue to do so, don't be

If you have been called to be a watchman and God has given you discernment, use it
and don't let anyone discourage or threaten you, fulfil your ministry.

God will help us.

Mis-translations and mis-interpretations

Despite widespread use of the phrase immortal soul, this terminology is found nowhere in the
Bible. Where did the idea of an immortal soul originate? Do Christians actually look and search the
bible to compare what their Pastors (Theologians) teach and lecture from the pulpit?? No
they DON‘T.

The concept of the soul's supposed immortality was first taught in ancient Egypt and Babylon. "The
belief that the soul continues in existence after the dissolution of the body is...speculation...nowhere
expressly taught in Holy Scripture...The belief in the immortality of the soul came to the Jews from
contact with Greek thought and chiefly through the philosophy of Plato, its principal exponent, who
was led to it through Orphic and Eleusinian mysteries in which Babylonian and Egyptian views were
strangely blended" (Jewish Encyclopedia, 1941, Vol. 6, "Immortality of the Soul," pp. 564, 566).

Plato (428-348 B.C.), the Greek philosopher and students of Socrates, taught that the body and the
"immortal soul" separate at death. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia comments on
ancient Israel's view of the soul: "We are influenced always more or less by the Greek, Platonic idea
that the body dies, yet the soul is immortal. Such an idea is utterly contrary to the Israelite
consciousness and is nowhere found in the Old Testament".

Early Christianity was influenced and corrupted by Greek philosophies as it spread through the Greek
and Roman world. By A.D. 200 the doctrine of the immortality of the soul became a controversy
among Christian believers.

In the Old Testament, man is referred to as a "soul" (Hebrew nephesh) more than 130 times. The
first place we find nephesh in reference to mankind is in the second chapter of Genesis: "And the
LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the
breath of life; and man became a LIVING SOUL"

The word translated "soul" in this verse is again the Hebrew word nephesh. Other translations of
the Bible state that man became a living "being" or "person." This verse does not say that
Adam had an immortal soul; rather it says that God breathed into Adam the "breath of life," and
Adam became a living soul. At the end of his days, when the breath of life left Adam, he died
and returned to dust.

The Old Testament plainly teaches that the soul dies. God told Adam and Eve, two "living
souls," that they would "surely die" if they disobeyed Him (Genesis 2:17). God also told Adam
that He had taken him from the dust of the earth and he would return to dust (Genesis 3:19).
The first-century Church did not hold to this belief: "The doctrine is increasingly regarded as a post-
apostolic idea, not only unnecessary but positively harmful to proper biblical interpretation and
If such an idea was not taught in the Church during the time of the apostles, how did it come to
assume such an important place in Christian doctrine?

Should we then accept a teaching that is not found in the Bible? Many people take it for granted that
their beliefs are based on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ and God's Word. Yet Jesus said in a
prayer to His Father, "Your word is truth" (John 17:17). Does God give men the liberty to draw
from the world's philosophers and incorporate their beliefs into biblical teaching as though they were
fact? It‘s NONSENSE!!



The Biblical definition of a soul is simply a breathing body. Notice that the text does not say that man
was given a soul, but rather he became a soul. A soul is not something a person has, it is the person.

Souls have blood (Jeremiah 2:34). Not only are people souls, but so are fish and
animals (Revelation 16:3).

The Hebrew word for soul ―nephesh‖, is variously translated

"person" (Genesis 14:21),
"self" (Leviticus 11:43),
"life" (Psalm 31:13),
"me" (Judges 16:30),
"creature" (Genesis 1:21),
"beast" (Leviticus 24:18),
"man" (2 Kings 12:4),
"thing" (Ezekiel 47:9), and
"fish" (Isaiah 19:10).

When translated "body" the nephesh is usually dead (Leviticus 21:11).

The Greek word for soul ―psuche‖, has the same meaning. In Matthew 16:25 Jesus commends
anyone who will lose his soul (psuche) for Christ‘s sake. It is often translated simply
as "life" (Matthew 2:20). It means "person" (Acts 7:14).

"My soul" and "your soul" are idiomatic expressions meaning "I" and "you" (Matthew 12:18;
2 Corinthians 12:15).


"If he set his heart upon man, if he gather unto himself his spirit and his breath; all
flesh shall PERISH together, and man shall turn again unto dust." Job 34:14, 15.

A soul is like the light that results when a light bulb is connected to a power source. The spirit, or
breath of life, is the electric current.
Electricity will produce light only while it is flowing through the bulb. When the filament in the bulb
breaks, the electrical circuit is broken, and the light goes out.
Just as the light cannot exist unless there is both electricity and a bulb, so there must be both the
breath of life and a functional body in order for there to be a living soul.


When a man dies his body (if not disintegrated) goes into a grave or tomb (Jn. 11:38) where within
a few days it begins to smell and decompose (Jn. 11:39), and it returns [Heb. shub] to the dust of
the ground from which it was taken (Gen. 3:17-19, Job 10:9, Psa. 9:17, etc., etc).

The "person" is said to be where the "body" is and the "person" is resurrected from the place
where the body is (Mat. 28:6). Only in a figurative or symbolic sense does a "body" ever go
to sheol (Jonah 2:2). Jonah was not "literally" in hell [sheol], but in the fish, and besides he
didn't even die. I'm sure Jonah's loss of perception inside the fish resembled his knowledge of the
word "sheol."


When a man dies his spirit returns to God Who gave it (GOD) (Lk. 23:46, Psa. 104:24-
30). The "spirit" is never said to go to hades or sheol, and the "soul" is never said to go
to Heaven at death. Men and beasts have the same spirit [ruach] and they go to the same
place (Ecc. 3:18-21). There is no getting around this: when God takes away a living soul's spirit, it
always dies. The spirit "gives life." No one can live without "spirit," no matter how young and
healthy he may be. There are no exceptions. If there are, where is the Scripture? A dead person
cannot experience anything- not pleasure in Heaven or pain in a fabled hell. This is a serious
thing. Rom. 14:23 says: "Now everything which is not out of faith is sin." If one doesn't
have Scriptures that show people go to eternal hell fire after death, then it is a sin to teach it.


When a man dies his soul goes to the unseen or imperceptible [Gk: hades, Heb: sheol]. We also
know that when man is in this condition (dead) it is likened to "sleep" (Psa. 13:3,
Dan. 12:1-2, Jn. 11:11-14). God Himself likens death to sleep,

"The Lord said unto Moses [concerning his imminent death], Behold, thou shalt sleep
with thy fathers ... " (Deut. 31:16).

"Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto
God who gave it" (Ecc. 12:7).

Another scripture witness:

―His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts
perish.‖ (Psalms 146:4).
This is substantiated by the fact that:

"The living knows that they shall die, but the dead know not anything"
(Eccl. 9:5, 6).

" ... for there is no work, nor device [contrivance, intelligence, reason], nor knowledge,
nor wisdom, in sheol." (Eccl. 9:10).

Do we think these entire Scriptures lie? According to what we just read in Eccl. 9:5, 6, 10, do dead
people know anything? And these verses are correctly translated, I can assure you, I have checked
each and every word, why don‘t you check them online yourself...

Most words have been corrupted through theology so that they are now used interchangeably, as if
they were synonymous. They are not synonymous. There may be certain similarities between soul
and spirit, but similarities do not make them one and the same. In every doctrine in Christendom we
have it twisted from our theologians and we have been forced to accept all the stupidity from the pulpit
by these false and stupid preachers, they really don‘t know what they teach and preach.

The "SOUL" is the seat of sensation, consciousness, and feelings, not the body or
the spirit. It is the spirit that imparts life to the body and the body then becomes
a living soul (Gen. 2:7).

A thorough study of the word "soul" in the Scriptures proves that it is used of consciousness,
feelings, and emotions. Hence, "sensation" is a good word to define its usage.

� souls can touch (Lev. 5:2).

� souls have knowledge (Pr. 2:10).
� souls have memory (Lam. 3:20).
� souls can love, and be joyful (Psa. 35:9; 86:4).
� souls can hunger and thirst (Deut. 14:26).
� souls can sin (Lev. 4:2).
� life can be given to a soul (Job 3:20).
� souls can die (Ezek. 18:20).
� souls can be converted (Psa. 19:7).
� none can keep alive his (own) soul (Psa. 22:29).
� honey is sweet to the soul (Pr. 16:24).
� even God has a soul (Lev. 26:11, I Sam. 2:35, Jer. 32:41).
� souls can hear (Acts 3:22-23).
� souls can experience pleasure (Heb. 10:3).
� souls can be purified (I Pet. 1:22).
� and souls can receive salvation (I Pet. 1:9).
� souls die (Rev. 16:3).

These verses show the wide range of emotions and sensations that "souls" experience, but dead
souls experience nothing in the unseen or imperceptible (hades). We need to pay close attention to
the meaning of words. Hades comes from the Greek a(i)des. The a is a prefix which is equivalent to
our un- and the stem -id means perceive. Thus we have UN-PERCEIVE, or imperceptible: the
unseen. Etymologically, the doctrine of torment in hell falls flat on its face. From the words that
God chose to call this condition of the soul after death, one thing is crystal clear: There is
absolutely no perception there. And the soul has everything to do with perception and sensation as
clearly seen from the verses above.

Because of the shameful way these words are translated and interchanged in the Authorized Version,
it is nearly impossible to understand their true meanings without an exhaustive concordance.


SPIRIT [pneuma] is translated LIFE in Rev. 13:5.

SOUL [nephesh] is translated HEART in Prov. 23:7, etc.
HEART [leb] is translated MIND in Prov. 21:27, I Sam. 9:20, etc.
SOUL [nephesh] is translated LIFE in Gen. 9:4, Lev. 17:11, etc.
SOUL [nephesh] is translated GHOST in Job 11:2.
SPIRIT [pneuma] is translated GHOST in Mark 1:8.
SOUL [nephesh] is translated BEAST in Lev. 24:18.
BEAST [chay] is translated LIFE in Lev. 18:18.
SOUL [nephesh] is translated BODY in Lev. 21:11, Hag. 2:13, etc.

This Kind Of Translating Is Not Responsible Scholarship- It's Confusing And Contradictory. This Is
How Much Trouble King James Has Given Us But It‘s Still The Best Among The Rest!

The Apostle Paul admonished Timothy to "have a pattern of sound words" (II Tim.
1:13). The Scriptures quoted above clearly show the translator's disregard for this instruction.
Man is mortal (Job 4:17). Not one Scripture says that man is "immortal" or has an "immortal" soul.
Not one.

"Our Lord, Jesus Christ: the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and
Lord of lords; who only has immortality" (I Tim. 6:14-16).

It is by means of the "resurrection" that God causes dead people to live again. The Apostle Paul said:
"Concerning the expectation and resurrection of the dead am I being judged" (Acts 23:6). The truth
regarding the "resurrection of the dead" is not even taught in Christendom today. They teach that
there are no dead people (only dead bodies). They teach that people are either alive on
earth, alive in Heaven, or alive in Hell. What need have we for a "resurrection of the dead" if there
are no dead people to resurrect? This is heresy!

Paul also stated: "Now if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither has Christ been
roused. Now if Christ has not been roused, for naught, consequently, is our
heralding, and for naught is your faith" (I Cor. 15:14-15). The very salvation of mankind
rests on the resurrection.

"Lord, if Thou were here, my brother would not have died!" (Jn. 11:32).

Did Christ resurrect Lazarus out of Hell fire? If He did, then Lazarus went to Hell by mistake. Did
Christ resurrect Lazarus out of Heaven? If He did, then Christ lied eight chapters earlier when He
said, "NO one has ascended into heaven ... " (Jn 3:13).Christ resurrected Lazarus out of
the TOMB (Jn. 11:38-39). Because that's where Lazarus WAS, in the TOMB, dead ASLEEP. This
historical example of Christ's resurrection powers was a foretaste of what Christ will do in the future
resurrections. This is how it is done. Dead people (not just dead bodies) will be resurrected from the
dead, not from life at some other geographical location (not heaven and not hell), but FROM THEIR
GRAVES, wherever they may be.

If it is essential that a man be saved before he dies, then God, indeed, would be derelict in His
responsibility toward His creatures. But where does it say that a man's eternal fate is sealed at his
death? Where? Nowhere! Grow up people of GOD!!

RESPONSIBILITY: Not only are all the billions of heathens who never heard the gospel not
responsible for their own salvation, but neither are we responsible for our salvation either.
Nowhere in the Scriptures does God hold man responsible for anything. This is just another man-
made doctrine that clashes with the Scriptures.

We can use the word "responsible" in a relative sense, such as: "It is a man's responsibility to
provide for his family." We all know what the word means. But even if this man doesn't provide for
his family, God will hold him accountable not responsible.

"For the word of God is living and operative, and keen above any two-edged
sword, and penetrating up to the parting of soul and spirit both of the
articulations and marrow, and is a judge of the sentiments and thoughts of the
heart. And there is not a creature which is not apparent in its sight. Now all is
naked and bare to the eyes of Him to Whom [God] we are ACCOUNTABLE"
(Heb. 4:12-13).

Even the King James Version, with its thousands of discrepancies, does not even once in its
fifteen hundred pages, use the word "responsible" or "responsibility."

Yet churches evolve whole doctrines around this word "responsibility." Things like: "you're
responsible for going to hell" or "it's your responsibility to accept Christ" or "the age of
responsibility" or "everyone is responsible for his or her deeds." Strange to make so big a deal of
a word that does not even appears in Scripture.
When a minor (a child) commits a crime, even the unjust courts of our land do not hold him
responsible. Is his crime simply overlooked? No. He must give an account for his actions. He is
accountable. He might be the victim of a broken home, with a drunkard father, a prostitute
mother, drug-hooked sisters, and gang-member brothers. Thus, he is not considered responsible.
Nonetheless, he is still accountable.

"Now I am saying to you that, for every idle declaration which men shall be
speaking they shall be rendering an ACCOUNT concerning it in the day of
judging" (Matt. 12:36).

"For all of us shall be presented at the dais of God ... Consequently then, each
of us shall be giving ACCOUNT concerning himself to God" (Rom. 14:11-12).

Read the dozens of scriptures where we are likened not only to "children," but to "little children."
God is dealing with mankind as minors. He holds them accountable, but nowhere does God
hold man responsible..

The church can only see the relative in God's word. They fail to see that God is behind everything
in the "absolute."

" ... according to the purpose of the One Who is OPERATING all in ACCORD
with the COUNSEL of His WILL." (Eph. 1:11).

The only One in the universe Who is responsible [able to respond] is God And so, God takes
full responsibility for everything even though He holds man accountable for his deeds. Man
is accountable for his deeds, not because he could have done otherwise, but because he
thinks he is responsible through his presumed free will. Because he actually did the things
he did. However, the Scriptures tell us that, "not in all" is this knowledge. Puny man really thinks
he is in control of his own destiny. He really thinks he is a "god unto himself." And the Christian
Church hasn't done very much to educate him out of this dilemma.

You see, to the theological peanut galleries of the world, if God is responsible for everything in
His creation, then He couldn't be justified in burning billions in eternal Hell fire! But if they can
make man responsible, then it's his own doing. But for man to be responsible, God would have
had to have given him much greater powers than even our Lord ever possessed.

"Verily, verily, I am saying to you, THE SON CANNOT BE DOING ANYTHING OF

HIMSELF ...‖ (John 5:19).

Are we greater than our own Lord? Answer:

―... apart from Me you can do nothing." (Jn. 15:5).
Well, there it is. God has given man no such powers.
"It is not in man to direct his own steps" (Jer. 10:23).

I know that this verse is shocking to contemplate. It is a real ego deflator. People do not want
their self-esteem brought that low. They love to talk humble pie, but they won't eat it. If God tells
us we can't even "direct our own steps," pray what can we do by ourselves?
I know this truth is too high for most. Most don't really meditate on such verses. They certainly
would never preach a sermon on them. They wouldn't be able to take credit for their own
salvation anymore (if they actually believed these Scriptures). They would be forced to get rid of
all their self worth. They couldn't feel all puffed up like the King of Assyria if they acknowledged
God's total Sovereignty in their lives. They don't have to believe it now. God isn't breaking
anyone's arm to accept these truths. But don't try to skillfully contradict these truths of the
Scriptures, for that only makes you look silly.

If God is absolutely responsible for the salvation of all His creatures (and He absolutely is), then
He is obligated to save them. He would have to save them. Their salvation would be assured.
(Wouldn't that be a terrible thing for theologians and clergymen to contemplate?) In other words,
since God is going to bring peace, happiness, and salvation to all of His creatures in Heaven
and Earth, God is a real God. A God worthy of the name. A God to truly be GLORIFIED!

He makes (causes) everything to turn out the way He predetermined it must be. The Scriptures
are full of statements and examples of how everything is operating according to God's
predetermined intentions. Theologians just don't approve of it. They don't like it. They will allow
for God to cause the sun to go up and go down every day, just as long as God hasn't determined
when they get up and lie down every day. But, like it or not, God has determined not only when
they get up and when they lie down, but also everything they will do in between.

If the translators understood this grand truth they would never have dared to translate
Rom. 8:26 as we find it in the Authorized Version.
A proper translation of Rom. 8:26 is thus:

"Now, similarly, the spirit also is aiding our infirmity, for what we should be
praying for, to accord with what must be, we are not aware, but the spirit
itself is pleading for us with inarticulate groanings."

God has determined that even our prayers must be " ... to accord with WHAT MUST BE
... "
"Accord" and "what must be" are in the original Greek manuscripts. God really did inspire Paul to
write this Scripture. Our prayers must " ... accord with WHAT MUST BE ... "

Rather than fight these grand declarations of God, we should glory in them and shout amen to

"There is no man that has power over the spirit to retain the spirit;
neither has he power in [Heb: authority over] the day of death..."
(Eccl. 8:8).

Is this verse too difficult for anyone to understand? The Scriptures are clear: YOU

Some Twisted Scriptures To Make A Doctrine Stand. Paul never said: "to
be absent from the body IS to be present with the Lord." There is NO SUCH
Let's quote it properly:
"We are confident, I say, and willing rather TO BE absent from the
body, and TO BE present with the Lord."

Or as Concordant Literal New Testament renders it:

"...rather to be away from home out of the body and to be at home
with the Lord."

There is a giant difference between the two words "IS" and "AND." Just the fact of
being "absent or separated" from our bodies, does not automatically equate with
being instantaneously "WITH" the Lord.

First we DIE and thereby become absent from or separated from our bodies--they
decay back into the dust of the ground. But some time AFTER our death we are
taken home to be with the Lord. Notice how Paul himself understood this. Are we "at
home with the Lord" at the instant of DEATH? No.

I Thess. 4:16-17
"For the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with
the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and THE
DEAD in Christ shall rise first. Then we which are alive and remain
shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the
Lord in the air; and so shall we ever be [at home] with the Lord."

Notice that all the DEAD in Christ rise at the SAME TIME, at His presence in the air.
But, not all of the DEAD in Christ DIED AT THE SAME TIME. Hence they were NOT
'at home with the Lord' at the very time of their death.

Consider the following statement from The New Catholic Encyclopedia:

"The soul in the Old Testament means not a part of man, but the whole man as a living
being. Similarly in the New Testament, it signifies human life: the life of an individual
conscious object" (Matthew 2:20-6:25; Luke 12:22, 23; 14:26; John 10:11,
15,17; John 13:37; Acts 27:10,22; Philippians 2:30; 1Thessalonians 2:8).
"Recent exegetes... have maintained that the New Testament does not teach the
immortality of the soul in the Hellenistic sense of survival of an immortal principle after
death" (The New Catholic Encyclopedia art. Soul, Human, Immortality of, In The Bible)


Death has two different meanings that are essential for us to differentiate:
1. The ACT OF DYING or termination of life.
All humanity will experience "the act of dying," but absolutely no one will ever
experience the "state of being dead." And this is because:

"For the living knows that they shall die but the dead know not
anything…" (Ecclesiastes 9:5).
This may be comforting to some, but scary to others. It all depends on your point of
view; your perspective; your emotional stability; your up-bringing; your
understanding. What I want to do in this little article is give you an encouraging
perspective of death. "How can anything be encouraging when it comes to death?"
you are probably asking. Well, let me try and answer that for you.

Virtually every time that I have read that verse (dozens of times), it was to prove to
someone that we do not have an immortal soul that lives on after death of the body,
nor do we have consciousness as is taught in Christendom. But this past year I took
another look at this verse and saw something else that I had never contemplated

Not only is there no consciousness in death, but there is no consciousness OF death

either. This is the encouraging part.

"The living KNOW that they shall die, but the dead KNOW

Let‘s think about that for a few moments and see if this is not quite encouraging.
"The living KNOW… the dead know NOTHING." The dead don‘t know that
they are dead. When you die, you will NOT KNOW THAT YOU ARE DEAD!
But it gets better. Not only will you never know that you are dead at some point in the
future, but from your perspective YOU NEVER EVEN LOST CONSCIOUSNESS.
This to me was a marvelous revelation.

Once God creates consciousness in a human they will NEVER EVER know anything
BUT CONSCIOUSNESS. From my perspective and from your perspective we will
never "know" ANYTHING but life and feelings and emotions and consciousness.
From our perspective we will never "know" what it is like to be dead. Oh we will
probably die some day (assuming that the Lord doesn‘t come first), but we will never
know that we were dead; we will never know what it is to BE dead, or to BE
unconscious. Others will know and sorrow (maybe?) that we are dead and gone, but
from OUR perspective we will never lose conscious reality, and we will never
"experience" being dead.

Now I didn‘t say we would not experience "dying." Most (albeit not all) people who
die, experience dying, but they do NOT experience death itself, nor will they ever. It
is impossible for someone to experience the death state, seeing that where there is
no consciousness, there is no experience, and therefore there is no memory of it. I
will carry this one step further. Even if there was no such thing as a resurrection from
the dead, the dead would never know that they died and would never know that they
are dead.

This to me is an amazing thing. Once God created consciousness, cognizance,

awareness, perception, sensation, emotions, and the like; we never ever loose it
from OUR PERSPECTIVE, and after all, whose perspective counts the most when it
comes to death—ours or someone else‘s?

We may all go through the fear of dying or even the pain of dying, but there is no
pain and no fear IN DEATH ITSELF. No one who is presently dead is aware of it, or
experiencing it, or being frightened by it, or anything else.


I was tempted to make that caption: DEATH IS LIKE SLEEP, but that would be
Scripturally inaccurate, as nowhere do the Scriptures state that death is "like" sleep,
but rather that death IS SLEEP. God prepared Moses for death with the following:

"And the Lord said unto Moses, Behold, you shall sleep [Heb: shakab—
to lie down, to rest, to sleep, to decease] with your fathers…" (Deut. 31:16).

David said: