Featured Jesus Christ Shed His Blood for Those in Hell

There is No Mention of either Jesus Christ Himself, at all,
nor of anyone at all being saved or,
"included in the Death of Jesus Christ on the Cross",
in this verse!

"But there were false prophets also among the people,
even as there shall be false teachers among you,
who privily shall bring in damnable heresies,
even denying the Lord that bought them,
and bring upon themselves swift destruction."

Jesus Christ isn't spoken of in that verse,
nor anything having to do with the subject of, "salvation".

This portion of your statement can still be said to be right on, however,
maybe, not the way you expected it to turn out,

 

Because there isn't anything in 2 Peter 2:1, about:
"this verse referring to the blood shed on the cross for sins".

That is:
"because Peter here uses “despótēs” (Master), and not, “kurios."

From:
The Cause of God and Truth
In Four Parts, Part I, Section LIV.
by John Gill, D.D.

"1. I do not think myself concerned to defend any of these senses
of the text mentioned, judging neither of them to be the meaning of
the words, and so have nothing to do with the reasonings made use
of in the confutation of them;...However, in order to give the genuine
sense of this text,

"let it be observed,

"2. That Christ is not here at all spoken of; nor is there one
syllable of his dying for any persons, in any sense whatever.

"The word despo,thj, Lord, does not design Christ
but God the Father of Christ.

"The only places besides this where this word is used, when
applied to a divine person, are Luke 2:29, Acts 4:24, 2 Tim. 2:21,
Jude 1:4, Rev. 6:10, in all which places God the Father is plainly
intended, and in most of them manifestly distinguished from Christ;

"nor is there anything in this text or context which obliges us to
understand it of the Son of God; nor should this be thought any
diminution of the Glory of Christ, since the word despo,thj is properly
expressive only of that power which masters have over their
servants;

"whereas the word ku,rioj,
which is used whenever Christ is called Lord,
signifies that dominion and authority which princes
have over their subjects. Besides, Christ is called King of kings,
and Lord of lords, and the Only Potentate;
yea, God over all, blessed for
ever.

"Moreover,

"3. When these persons are said to be bought, the meaning is, not
that they were redeemed by the blood of Christ, for, as is before
observed, Christ is not intended. Besides, whenever redemption by
Christ is spoken of, the price is usually mentioned, or some
circumstance or another which fully determines the sense of it;
(see Acts 20:28; 1 Cor. 6:20; Eph.1:7; 1 Pet. 1:18-19;
Rev. 5:9; Rev. 14:3-4),

"whereas here is not the least hint of anything of this kind.

"Add to this, that such who are Redeemed by Christ,
are never left to deny Him, so as to perish Eternally;
for could such be lost, or bring on themselves swift destruction,
Christ’s Purchase would be in vain,
and the Ransom Price be Paid for naught.

"But,

"4. The word "buying" regards temporal deliverance, and
particularly the redemption of the people of Israel out of Egypt;

"who are therefore called the people the Lord had purchased.

"The phrase is borrowed from Deuteronomy 32:6;

"Do ye thus requite the Lord, O foolish people and unwise?
Is not he thy Father that hath bought thee?
Hath he not made thee and established thee?"

Nor is this the only place the apostle Peter refers to in this chapter;
(see vv. 12, 13, compared with Deuteronomy 32:5).

2 Peter 2:12; "But these, as natural brute beasts,
made to be taken and destroyed,
speak evil of the things that they understand not;
and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;

13 "And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness,
as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time.

"Spots they are and blemishes,
sporting themselves with their own deceivings
while they feast with you;"

Deuteronomy 32:5; "They have corrupted themselves,
their spot is not the spot of his children:
they are a perverse and crooked generation."

"Now the persons the apostle writes to, were Jews,
the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia,
Asia, and Bithyna, a people who, in all ages,
valued, themselves upon, and boasted mightily
of their being the bought, purchased people of the Lord;

"wherefore Peter makes use of this phrase
much in the same manner as Moses had done before him,
to aggravate the ingratitude and impiety
of these false teachers among the Jews;

"that they should deny, if not in words, at least in works,
that mighty Jehovah, who had of old redeemed their fathers
out of Egypt, with a stretched out arm, and, in successive ages,
had distinguished them with peculiar favors;

"being ungodly men, turning the Grace,
the Doctrine of the Grace of God, into lasciviousness,

"Hence,

"5. Nothing can be concluded from this passage in favor of
Christ’s dying for them that perish;

"since neither Christ, nor the Death of Christ,
nor Redemption by his blood,
are here once mentioned, nor in the least intended. "

"Nor can these words be thought to be a proof
and instance of the final and total apostasy of real saints,
since there is not anything said of these false teachers,
which gives any reason to believe
that they were true believers in Christ,
or ever had the Grace of the Spirit Wrought in their souls."

 

No, it is not.

Jude 4: "For there are certain men crept in unawares,
who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men,
turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness,
and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ."

I have seen where people would fight you over a comma
and say that a comma is always making a distiction
beween two different subjects, or people, or Persons, etc.

And there is no mention of anything being "bought" in Jude 4;

However;
JUDE 4 DOES DISCRIBE WHO THESE MEN WERE "DENYING".
720 [e] ἀρνούμενοι. arnoumenoi "denying".

These men were "denying" "The Only Lord God", The Father,

There are two Persons mentioned that these men were denying:

1.) The Father, Who was:
1203 [e] Δεσπότην, Despotēn, master.
Definition: lord, master; Usage: a lord, master, or prince

and"
2532 [e] καὶ kai "and" Conj,
"and" in addition to, "denying the only Lord God", The Father,

2.) "Our Lord Jesus Christ"
where it says that they were also "denying", "our Lord Jesus Christ",

2962 [e] Κύριον Kyrion Lord,

2424 [e] Ἰησοῦν Iēsoun Jesus,

5547 [e] Χριστὸν Christon Christ.

... τὸν μόνον δεσπότην Θεόν, καὶ Κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν
... the only master God, and Lord of us Jesus Christ.

Where "The God Who bought them" is God the Father,
Who they were "denying",
borrowed from it's parrallel passage in Deuteronomy 32:6, above;

"Do ye thus requite the Lord, O foolish people and unwise?
Is not he thy Father that hath bought thee?
Hath he not made thee and established thee?"

And they were also "denying"
"our Lord Jesus Christ", in Jude 4, Who is our Lord Jesus Christ.

And there is no mention of anything being "bought" in Jude 4;

ΙΟΥΔΑ 1:4 Greek NT: RP Byzantine Majority Text 2005
Παρεισέδυσαν γάρ τινες ἄνθρωποι, οἱ πάλαι προγεγραμμένοι εἰς τοῦτο τὸ κρίμα, ἀσεβεῖς, τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν χάριν μετατιθέντες εἰς ἀσέλγειαν, καὶ τὸν μόνον δεσπότην θεὸν καὶ κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν χριστὸν ἀρνούμενοι.

ΙΟΥΔΑ 1:4 Greek NT: Greek Orthodox Church
παρεισέδυσαν γάρ τινες ἄνθρωποι, οἱ πάλαι προγεγραμμένοι εἰς τοῦτο τὸ κρίμα, ἀσεβεῖς, τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν χάριν μετατιθέντες εἰς ἀσέλγειαν καὶ τὸν μόνον δεσπότην καὶ Κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἀρνούμενοι.

ΙΟΥΔΑ 1:4 Greek NT: Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550
παρεισέδυσαν γάρ τινες ἄνθρωποι οἱ πάλαι προγεγραμμένοι εἰς τοῦτο τὸ κρίμα ἀσεβεῖς τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν χάριν μετατιθέντες εἰς ἀσέλγειαν καὶ τὸν μόνον δεσπότην Θεόν, καὶ κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἀρνούμενοι

 

No, it is not.

Jude 4: "For there are certain men crept in unawares,
who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men,
turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness,
and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ."

(I have seen where people on the BB would fight you over a comma
and say that a comma is always making a distinction
between two different subjects, or people, or Persons, etc...(?)

And there is no mention of anything being "bought" in Jude 4;

However;
JUDE 4 DOES DESCRIBE WHO THESE MEN WERE "DENYING".
720 [e] ἀρνούμενοι. arnoumenoi "denying".

These men in JUDE 4 were "denying"
1.) "The Only Lord God", The Father,

as well as these men were "denying",
The Second Person in The Triune Godhead, God the Son:
2.) "Our Lord Jesus Christ".

There are Two DIVINE PERSONS mentioned in JUDE 4
that these men were "denying":

1.) The Father, Who was:
1203 [e] Δεσπότην, Despotēn, master, lord.
Definition: lord, master; Usage: a lord, master, or prince

"denying the only Lord God", The Father,
The First Person in The Triune Godhead,

and:
2532 [e] καὶ kai "and" Conj,
"and" IS ADDED to ADD in addition to, "the only Lord God",
Who is The Father, The First Person in The Triune Godhead,
in that JUDE 4 passage,

it ADDS, using the word, "and":
The Second Person in The Triune Godhead, God the Son:
2.) "Our Lord Jesus Christ"
where it says that they were also "denying",
"our Lord Jesus Christ",

2962 [e] Κύριον Kyrion Lord,

2424 [e] Ἰησοῦν Iēsoun Jesus,

5547 [e] Χριστὸν Christon Christ.

1.) "the only Master God,"
... "τὸν μόνον δεσπότην Θεόν,

"and"
..."καὶ"

2.) "our Lord Jesus Christ,"
..."Κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν".

There are Two DIVINE PERSONS mentioned
that these men were "denying", in JUDE 4:

These men in JUDE 4 were "denying"
1.) GOD THE FATHER, where it says, "The Only Lord God",

as well as these men were "denying",
2.) GOD THE SON,
The Second Person in The Triune Godhead,
where it says, "Our Lord Jesus Christ".

 

See post #22; Jesus Christ Shed His Blood for Those in Hell

Outline of post #22;

The Cause of God and Truth
In Four Parts, Part I, Section LIV.
by John Gill, D.D.

"1. I do not think myself concerned
to defend any of these senses of the text mentioned,
judging neither of them to be the meaning of the words,
and so have nothing to do
with the reasonings made use of in the confutation of them...

"However, in order to give the genuine sense of this text,
let it be observed;

"2. That Christ is not here at all spoken of; nor is there one
syllable of his dying for any persons, in any sense whatever.

"The word despo,thj, Lord, does not design Christ
but God the Father of Christ..."

"Moreover,

"3. When these persons are said to be bought,
the meaning is,
not that they were redeemed by the blood of Christ,
because, as is before observed, Christ is not intended..."

"But,

"4. The word "bought" regards temporal deliverance, and
particularly the redemption of the people of Israel out of Egypt;

"who are therefore called the people the Lord had purchased.

"The phrase is borrowed from Deuteronomy 32:6;

"Do ye thus requite the Lord, O foolish people and unwise?
Is not he thy Father that hath bought thee?
Hath he not made thee and established thee?"

"Hence,

"5. Nothing can be concluded from this passage
in favor of Christ’s dying for them that perish;

"since neither Christ, nor the Death of Christ,
nor Redemption by his blood,
are here once mentioned, nor in the least intended. "

Finis.

 

Deuteronomy 32:6;

"...the Lord...
Is not He thy Father that hath bought thee?"

In 2 Peter 2:1, "But there were false prophets also among the people,
even as there shall be false teachers among you,
who privily shall bring in damnable heresies,
even denying the Lord that bought them,
and bring upon themselves swift destruction,"

we see that Peter this is one of several verses
from The Old Testament book of Deuteronomy, in chapter 32
that Peter has quoted in this 2nd chapter of 2 Peter.

After seeing that 2 Peter 2:1 is quoted from The Old Testament
and was borrowed by Peter, from Deuteronomy 32:6,

we can reference that verse, to guide us in our understanding
of what Peter is talking about there and referring to, specifically,
when he said that there were false teachers who were,
"denying the Lord that bought them", and in order to
help us also in seeing what Peter was definitely not talking about.

Look at Deuteronomy 32:6;

"Do ye thus requite the Lord, O foolish people and unwise?

"Is not He thy Father that hath bought thee?

"Hath He not made thee and established thee?"[/QUOTE]

Right there where Deuteronomy 32:6c it is asking,
"hath he not made thee, and established thee?"

it has to do with all the Great Accomplishments God had Performed
for The Jews, in The Nation of Israel, The Lord uses words
when He speaks about the times that He has Delivered them,

as that He has not only "made" "and established" them,
but that The Lord is said to have also Purchased and "bought" them;
in His Own Words, "Is not He thy Father that hath bought thee?

 

I have read some of this thread and quite frankly I do not see what the problem is. We just have to look at scripture to get the biblical answer.

Question did Christ Shed His Blood for Those in Hell
Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone.

1Jn 2:2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.

1Ti 2:6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time,

1Ti 4:10 For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe.

Rom 5:6 For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

This is not a difficult question to answer. Unless those in hell are a special class of people that are not covered by "all", everybody", "whole world", or "ungodly" then Christ died for them.

 

Let's see if you fit into your own category as being:

Are you saying that you are getting that understanding from Luke 22?

Have you ever read Luke 22?

Here is part of Luke 22, in verses 14 through 30, if you haven't;

"14; "And when the hour was come, he sat down,
and the twelve apostles with him."

The "twelve apostles" who came with Jesus included Judas.

"15; "And he said unto them,
With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer:

Jesus was speaking here
to all "twelve apostles", which included Judas.

16; "For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof,
until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God."

Therefore, when Jesus said, "I say unto you",
this could not be said by;

that Jesus was including Judas in what He was saying,
because Judas would have been dead by that time
Jesus said it was going to be when,
"it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God",

and, therefore, when Jesus said "unto you" that He would not
"eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God",
if Jesus was including Judas in that Prediction,
when Jesus was saying, "unto you",
THEN, JESUS SIMPLY LIED.

Having said that, I would be more inclined to believe
that for any honest person to conclude
that when Jesus spoke the words that He did throughout Luke 22,

JESUS CHRIST WAS NOT ALWAYS SPECIFICALLY
INCLUDING EVERYONE THAT COULD HEAR WHAT HE WAS SAYING,

EVERY TIME HE SAID ANYTHING, IN PARTICULAR, TO BE DIRECTED
AND ADDRESSED TO EVERY ONE OF THEM, PERSONALLY,

AND TO BE ABSOLUTELY APPLICABLE TO EVERY INDIVIDUAL
PERFECTLY, IN EVERY POSSIBLE SENSE OF EVERY WORD HE SAID, AS INTENDED

AND MEANT TO BE TAKEN TO HEART AS THEIR VERY OWN MESSAGE FROM GOD,
TO ALL OF THEM WHO WERE PRESENT THAT COULD HEAR HIM TALKING,

OR JESUS WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE JUST BEEN A PROLIFIC LIAR,
WHO LIED OVER AND OVER, THROUGHOUT THIS ENTIRE CHAPTER 22 OF LUKE.

AND......?

THAT WOULD BE A VERY STUPID THING TO EVER SUGGEST
OR TRY TO SAY UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.

So, I'm going to stop right there, to discuss the weakest possible
stupid assumption that could ever be made about a Bible passage, since
at the same time, it happens to also be the most Blasphemous argument imaginable.

If you have a Bible and you can read and it means anything to you
and you have the least bit of common sense, then the word "many",
in the parallel passage in Luke 22:20, of God's revealed Words
in Matthew 26:28, places a Divine Limiting Criterion of Restriction
on the word, "you" in Luke 22:20,

"For this is my blood of the new testament,
which is shed for many for the remission of sins", Matthew 26:28,

and if you do not have the Spiritual and Intellectual Capabilities,
therefore, to read Luke 22:20, as saying in every respect to Jesus,

20; "Likewise also the cup after supper, saying,
This cup is the new testament in my blood,
which is shed for you",
(if not for) "many" (of you,...btw, now that you mention it, just to be precise),

AS JESUS GIVES A QUICK GLAZE OVER TOWARD THE ONE
WHO JESUS WAS ABOUT TO SAY,
"the hand of him that betrayeth Me is with Me on the table",

SINCE JESUS KNEW THAT HE WAS ABOUT TO BE BETRAYED,

AND JESUS KNEW WHO IT WAS THAT WAS GOING TO BETRAY HIM,

AND JESUS ALSO KNEW WHEN HE DIED "FOR "THE SINS OF HIS PEOPLE" (MT, 1:21)
THAT THAT PERSON HAD BEEN PLANNED TO BE EXCLUDED FROM HIS SUFFERING,

FROM THE COUNSEL HALLS OF ETERNITY PAST IN WHICH
JESUS PARTICIPATED, WITH GOD THE FATHER AND THE HOLY SPIRIT,
SO THAT NONE OF THESE EVENTS WERE OF ANY SURPRISE TO HIM,

then, Don't Bring Your Guns to Town,

BECAUSE ALL OF THE SHOOTING OFF OF YOUR MOUTH
JUST PROVES TO BE MORE GODAWEFUL BETRAYALS
OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST.


17; "And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves:

18; "For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.

19; "And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

20; "Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

21; "But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table.

22; "And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!

23; "And they began to inquire among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing.

24; "And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest.

25; "And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.

26; "But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve.

27; "For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth.

28; "Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations.

29; "And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;

30; "That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel."

 

According to the flimsiest argument known to mankind,
AND THE MOST HIDEOUSLY EVIL AND WICKED
BLOODCURDLING SUGGESTION EVER MADE
THAT JESUS HAD TOLD JUDAS
THAT JESUS WAS GOING TO SHED HIS BLOOD for JUDAS,

Jesus was, of course, talking to Judas AGAIN HERE, when He said,
"I tell you I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God”

and Judas died shortly after this and would never live
for Jesus' words to come true about him,
that Judas would "eat" The Lord's Supper, again
when "it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God",

therefore, JESUS HAD TO HAVE OBVIOUSLY BEEN LYING THERE,
ACCORDING TO THE MOST PRINCIPAL COMPONENT
OF THAT VERY STUPID AND DEMONIC THEORY,

"THAT WHEN JESUS TALKED TO THE TWELVE,
HE MEANT FOR JUDAS TO KNOW, OF A CERTAINTY,
THAT JESUS WAS PROMISING JUDAS
THAT JESUS WAS FOR SURE GOING TO SHED HIS BLOOD for him.

NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. NO FLINCHING. NTHER POSSIBILITY,"

AS GOD-HATING AS THAT SOUNDS AS AN AFFRONT
TO EVERY ATTRIBUTE OF GOD, BEGINNING WITH GOD'S JUSTICE.

TO CLAIM THAT GOD IS UNJUST AND ACTS IN DOUBLE JEOPARDY
BY PUNISHING JUDAS IN HELL FOREVER, FOR HIS SINS,

AFTER ALSO PUNISHING JESUS ON THE CROSS
FOR THE SAME EQUIVALENT AMOUNT OF SUFFERING
FOR JUDAS' SINS, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN ENOUGH
TO HAVE PAID FOR JUDAS' ETERNAL HELL,

IS ACCUSING GOD OF BEING UNJUST AND SINFULLY IMPERFECT.
...

Again, according to the flimsiest argument known to mankind,
AND THE MOST HIDEOUSLY EVIL AND WICKED
BLOODCURDLING SUGGESTION EVER MADE
THAT JESUS HAD TOLD JUDAS
THAT JESUS WAS GOING TO SHED HIS BLOOD for JUDAS,

Jesus was, of course, talking to Judas AGAIN HERE, when He said,
"I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes”

and Judas died shortly after this and would never live
for Jesus' words to come true about JUDAS,
where Jesus said,
"I will not drink of the fruit of the vine",
"until the kingdom of God comes”,

so with Judas being dead far before "the kingdom of God comes”
therefore, JESUS HAD TO HAVE OBVIOUSLY BEEN LYING THERE,
ACCORDING TO THE MOST PRINCIPAL COMPONENT
OF THAT VERY STUPID AND DEMONIC THEORY,

"THAT WHEN JESUS TALKED TO THE TWELVE,
HE MEANT FOR JUDAS TO KNOW, OF A CERTAINTY,
THAT JESUS WAS PROMISING JUDAS
THAT JESUS WAS FOR SURE GOING TO SHED HIS BLOOD for him.

NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. NO FLINCHING. NTHER POSSIBILITY."
...

And again, according to the flimsiest argument known to mankind,
AND THE MOST HIDEOUSLY EVIL AND WICKED
BLOODCURDLING SUGGESTION EVER MADE
THAT JESUS HAD TOLD JUDAS
THAT JESUS WAS GOING TO SHED HIS BLOOD for JUDAS,

Jesus was, of course, talking to Judas AGAIN HERE, when He said,
"Do this in Remembrance of Me”,

however, Judas died shortly after this and would never live
for Jesus' words to come true about him,
that Judas could partake of The Lord's Supper, again, and
"Do this in Remembrance of Me”, because JUDAS WOULD BE DEAD,
therefore, JESUS HAD TBVIOUSLY NOT KNOW OF JUDAS' DEATH,
OR JESUS WOULD HAVE NEVER COMMANDED JUDAS,
to partake of The Lord's Supper and "Do this in Remembrance of Me”,

SO, JESUS COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE THE ALL-KNOWING GOD,

ACCORDING TO THE MOST PRINCIPAL COMPONENT
OF THAT VERY STUPID AND DEMONIC THEORY

"THAT WHEN JESUS TALKED TO THE TWELVE,
HE MEANT FOR JUDAS TO KNOW, OF A CERTAINTY,
THAT JESUS WAS PROMISING JUDAS
THAT JESUS WAS FOR SURE GOING TO SHED HIS BLOOD for him.

NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. NO FLINCHING. NTHER POSSIBILITY."
...

 

Nope. I can tell you that, right now!

Not at all.

Not by any means.
...

29; "And I appoint unto you a kingdom,
as my Father hath appointed unto me"

According to the flimsiest argument known to mankind,
AND THE MOST HIDEOUSLY EVIL AND WICKED
BLOODCURDLING SUGGESTION EVER MADE
THAT JESUS HAD TOLD JUDAS
THAT JESUS WAS GOING TO SHED HIS BLOOD for JUDAS,

Jesus was, of course, talking to Judas AGAIN HERE, when He said,
"And I appoint unto you a kingdom,
as My Father hath appointed unto Me"

And yet, Judas died shortly after this and would never live
for Jesus' words to come true about JUDAS,

WHEN JESUS SAID WITH HIS OWN MOUTH TO JUDAS,
"I appoint unto you a kingdom",
BECAUSE JESUS WAS TALKING TO JUDAS WHEN JESUS SAID "you",

BUT, DIDN'T JESUS KNOW THAT JUDAS WOULD BE DEAD?
AND THAT JESUS WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO
"appoint unto you" (WHERE JESUS IS TALKING TO JUDAS)
"a kingdom, as My Father hath appointed unto Me"

AND WHY ON EARTH DID JESUS CHOOSE TO LIE TO JUDAS
ABOUT APPOINTING HIM A KINGDOM???? AT A TIME LIKE THAT??

JESUS HAD TO KNOW THAT HE WAS OBVIOUSLY LYING TO JUDAS,
ACCORDING TO THE MOST PRINCIPAL COMPONENT
OF THAT VERY STUPID AND DEMONIC THEORY,

THAT WHEN JESUS TALKED TO THE TWELVE,
HE MEANT FOR JUDAS TO KNOW, OF A CERTAINTY,
THAT JESUS WAS PROMISING JUDAS
THAT JESUS WAS FOR SURE GOING TO SHED HIS BLOOD for him.

NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. NO FLINCHING. NTHER POSSIBILITY.
...

30; "That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom,
and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel."

OH NO!, OH NO!!,

According to the flimsiest argument known to mankind,
AND THE MOST HIDEOUSLY EVIL AND WICKED,
BLOODCURDLING SUGGESTION EVER MADE
THAT JESUS HAD TOLD JUDAS
THAT JESUS WAS GOING TO SHED HIS BLOOD for JUDAS,

Jesus AGAIN was talking to Judas HERE,
AND MADE A VERY SOLEMN, DIVINE, PROMISE TO JUDAS
when He said,
"That ye may eat and drink at My table in my kingdom,
and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel."

BUT, BUT, BUT, Judas died shortly after this and would never live
for Jesus' words to come true about him,
that Judas "may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom,
and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel."

HOW CRUEL OF JESUS, WHEN JESUS KNEW
THAT JESUS MEANT WHAT HE SAID AND SAID WHAT HE MEANT

AND WHERE JESUS ALSO KNEW THAT JUDAS UNDERSTOOD
THAT JESUS WAS SPEAKING DIRECTLY TO HIM,
WHEN JESUS SAID, "That ye", SEE THERE?,
"That ye", MEANING JUDAS,
"may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom",

WHY WOULD JESUS HAVE LIED TO JUDAS ABOUT ALL THAT,
WHEN JESUS KNEW, AFTER ALL, JUDAS WAS ON HIS LAST LEGS??

WHAT IS HEAVEN'S NAME IS GOING ON WITH ALL THAT?

IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM RIGHT, FOR JESUS TO DO HIM THAT WAY.

AND, IF THAT'S NOT BAD ENOUGH,
JESUS HAD TBVIOUSLY KNOW AGAIN
THAT HE WAS LYING THROUGH HIS TEETH TO JUDAS,

"EVEN THOUGH (??)
JESUS WAS ABOUT TO DIE FOR JUDAS' SINS (??)
EVEN THOUGH THAT WOULDN'T DO JUDAS ANY GOOD, EITHER???

THAT'S DOUBLE-DECKER MEAN AND CRUEL!!

AND THAT'S ALL JUST VERY, VERY DOPEY, AND YET IT IS,
ACCORDING TO THE MOST PRINCIPAL COMPONENT
OF THAT VERY STUPID AND DEMONIC THEORY,

"THAT WHEN JESUS TALKED TO THE TWELVE,
HE MEANT FOR JUDAS TO KNOW, OF A CERTAINTY,
THAT JESUS WAS PROMISING JUDAS
THAT JESUS WAS FOR SURE GOING TO SHED HIS BLOOD for him.

NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. NO FLINCHING. NTHER POSSIBILITY,"

AS GOD-HATING AS THAT SOUNDS AS AN AFFRONT
TO EVERY ATTRIBUTE OF GOD, BEGINNING WITH GOD'S JUSTICE.

TO CLAIM THAT GOD IS UNJUST AND ACTS IN DOUBLE JEOPARDY
BY PUNISHING JUDAS IN HELL FOREVER, FOR HIS SINS,

AFTER ALSO PUNISHING JESUS ON THE CROSS
FOR THE SAME EQUIVALENT AMOUNT OF SUFFERING
FOR JUDAS' SINS, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN ENOUGH
TO HAVE PAID FOR JUDAS' ETERNAL HELL, AND

IS ACCUSING GOD OF BEING UNJUST AND SINFULLY IMPERFECT.
...

And with that, I'm looking very much forward,
to having these very dopey posts and God-Forsaken thread titles
hidden from my view, compliments of the wonderful "Ignore" feature.

Praise The Lord, for it!!

NICE!