To What Extent Should The Biblical Languages Shape Our Theology?

[TCGreek]

So that today, most of Christendom believes in Catholic doctrines, Secular Humanist doctrines, etc. (such as hell=lake of fire; man is only two parts) not because it's some big secret, but it has been a gradual decline. I doubt that much of it is intentional, although this is one thing that Secular Humanists stated was ther objective 70 years ago.

1. Can you kindly demonstrate to me that Jesus' reference to eternal fire in Matt. 25:41 is not the lake of fire of Rev. 20?

2. I do believe gehenna is the lake of life of Rev. 20. But I wish for you to prove me wrong.

 

[Amy.G]

That's funny. Most of those who are on the ME issue are KJVO. I thought you were one who commented that that's why you couldn't understand it because you aren't KJVO. I know that comment was made.

Lacy made the list for you and showed that the majority of those who preach the gospel of the Kingdom are KJVO.

Ah, yes, a little search and here it is, a quote by you, Amy. G:



And here's the link to the discussion on the Lordship Salvation thread:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1049100&postcount=277

I expect this sort of thing (using dishonesty and misrepresentation) from certain people, but I expected better from you.

What did I misrepresent? You were telling me about the notes in the KJV that would help explain the text (which in your opinion I wasn't understanding) and I responded sarcastically that that must be why I didn't understand your doctrine because I don't use the KJV. Now, what have I misrepresented? I never made a comment on whether or not I was KJVO, just that I don't use the KJV.

I am not dishonest. I do make mistakes, but I do not deliberately deceive anyone.

Why would even accuse me of such unless you're trying to discredit me or just cause trouble?