Hell book complete

Information regarding The Narrow Path Ministries.
Roberto
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 8:57 pm

Re: Hell book complete

Post by Roberto » Sun Nov 10, 2013 12:19 am

paulespino wrote:I have also started reading your book and it is easy to understand for an ESL ( English as a second language ) person like me.

But there are a few words that I'm having difficulty to understand such as the word Prima Facie, posit and a few.

I will post the words that I'm having difficulty when I finish reading perhaps someone can help me understand them.

It is very informative and I enjoy reading it.

Your work is like a work of a Scholar but yet easy to understand.
Prima facie means that something looks a certain way before you analyze it and try to think of other things that it might mean!

User avatar
Michelle
Posts: 845
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:16 pm

Re: Hell book complete

Post by Michelle » Sun Nov 10, 2013 11:39 am

I also got the book a week ago on my kindle. I'm a very slow reader (plus I'm kind of busy all the time) so it's going to take me a while to finish. Anyway, the first three chapters have been great so far. As others have said, it's very accessible.

paulespino
Posts: 267
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:02 am

Re: Hell book complete

Post by paulespino » Sun Nov 10, 2013 7:45 pm

Thanks Robert

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Hell book complete

Post by Singalphile » Tue Nov 19, 2013 10:14 am

I added my review to the others at amazon.com (where I bought it). I hesitated to do so because it wasn't all positive (and what good is a negative opinion now?), but I believe that Steve did request reviews.

Here's my criticism:
The content of the book's second half is good, but I would prefer a format more like the Revelation: 4 Views book. I'd take each relevant Bible verse or passage (grouped in some cases, e.g. grouped OT verses about judgment or grouped gospel parallels) and simply quote/list them in order (Genesis through Rev.). Each passage or verse group would be followed by an interpretation from the perspective of each of the three views. That would be more of an "Everything You Want to Know about Hell" format. As it is, it's more of an "Everything that Steve Gregg Thinks about Hell". (Not that that's bad. I've listened to every available TNP broadcast and scores of his other lectures, so I obviously value his opinions.) It would also keep the views more clearly delineated, and it would be easier to see the Biblical strengths and weaknesses of each view, I think.

I was trying to put something like this together myself (currently at 70 pages, mostly just the verses without the commentary). I stopped my work in anticipation of this book, but I'll resume now. (Steve's book will be a very useful source of additional relevant verses.)

As stated previously, the whole book is well written, interesting, and informative. The first 6 chapters were particularly good, and I will likely reference those again in the future. Thank you, Steve! You've definitely saved me many hours. :)
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: Hell book complete

Post by steve » Tue Nov 19, 2013 12:26 pm

Hi Singalphile,

Thanks for the review! Were there some verses that were omitted from my treatment of any of the views? I know that there are hundreds of verses in the Old Testament that use words like "destroy," to describe the judgment of the wicked. I didn't list every one, though I gave quite a few examples of them and mentioned how many hundreds of them there are. Apart from that, I am not aware of leaving out any relevant texts.

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Hell book complete

Post by Singalphile » Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:53 pm

steve wrote:Were there some verses that were omitted from my treatment of any of the views?
Hi, steve. :)

I'm sure that you did discuss or reference most of the major passages. It is the overall format of the last 6 chapters that I would have personally done differently.

For example, let's say I want to know the positive case that each view has in regards to, say, Matthew 8:10-12, John 10:28, 1 Cor 15:21-22, Heb 6:2, James 5:20, Heb 2:9, and Rev 14:9-13.

Well, I'm sure you discuss or at least referenced most or all of those passages somewhere, but I could not find them all easily (although this would be easier with an e-book, I guess) and even when I do find them, I don't think I'd get a clear explanation of how each view interprets each passage.

I would have preferred something exactly like your Rev book - lay out the relevant verses/passages (grouping the similar ones) and then have three explanatory columns underneath, one for each view. That could just be my preference, of course, but I do also feel like the sort of three-way debate (present, cross-examine) format tends to jumble the views up and doesn't give as clear an overall presentation of each view separately as one could get, in the same way that a three-way boxing match would probably not give a very clear indication of which boxer is really the best.

I guess that you could group all relevant OT verses into maybe 10-20 distinct verses/groups, including individual passage like Daniel 12, which would leave perhaps 100 verses or groups of verses in the NT, I guess.

Perhaps that's not practical or it would have been too long.

Anyway, that's all. .. though now that you ask, I don't remember if Jude 1:12-13 & 2 Peter 2:17 (darkness reserved) were mentioned. I find those interesting and they're not usually mentioned.

Again, I enjoyed the book and found it informative and it will be useful to me. I will certainly recommend it to my Christian friends and Bible study group if they ask for a book on the subject.
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

User avatar
jriccitelli
Posts: 1317
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:14 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: Hell book complete

Post by jriccitelli » Thu Nov 28, 2013 12:17 pm

(To Steve;) Are you saying your belief is that someone who is 'not' a Christian has no reason to worry? Look at your statement. What is the point in being a Christian? Isn't the idea and definition of: being a 'Christian' = being a 'believer'? (Me, this thread pg.7. Thu Oct 31)
You tell me you have answered this a dozen times, but all I can glean from miles of your posts seems to be your belief that there are two types of saved people;
I believe this lifetime is a unique season of opportunity to learn the lessons of faith and pass the tests of obedience, in order to qualify to reign with Christ forever… Only those who remain faithful unto death are thus crowned… Some people never turn to Christ in this lifetime, and others do for awhile, but fall away under testing… the UR theory suggests that people may yet repent and be released to dwell under the reign of the saints. (Steve, Barclay was convinced’ p17, Thu Dec 01, 2011)
It would hard to say these people are ‘Christians’ as the definition is abit lost in the doctrine of someone repenting in the LOF. Your arguments for UR needs people repenting in the LOF to be saved, but is that faith? Are these people believers? Are these people Christians? Is that trusting in Christ for your salvation? It would be hard to determine what label some person coming out of the LOF would have, since you yourself say they do not get to reign with Christ in the New Jerusalem;
If there is any return from the lake of fire to the new earth, it is to the environs outside the city gates of New Jerusalem (Steve, ibid)
My point was that they are not technically believers in the ‘Gospel’. Because if they had believed they would have never been in the LOF at all. What are these people technically? Saved or alive? Do they have the Spirit of Christ living in them while they abide in the realm outside the gates?
In my opinion, these who were not faithful in life have forever forfeited their opportunity to reign with Christ (Steve, ibid)
This doctrine of a separate group of people outside the gates of Jerusalem forever (although I have encountered it before as a question) is not something I have ever heard ‘defended’ by any bible teachers.
Especially when considering the points of Rev.22 we went over in the; ‘UR evokes many emotions’ thread, even Singalphile pointed out Steve was going contraire to his own Revelation book;
To quote from page 500 of Steve's book about Revelation 22 "Verses 6 through 21 form an epilogue to the book of Revelation. The prophecy and the message of the book has been given in completeness, ...." (Singlaphile, ‘UR evokes many emotions’ thread pg4)
I have noticed this ‘Kingdom Christian’, 'reigning with Christ' group terminology being repeated in your theology for awhile, I perceive you are often speaking about the distinction between these two post-mortem groups of people. Is this teaching unique to UR or does it surface other places also?
I am still surprised Steve would 'defend' this idea of two sets of saved people, in two separated places.
If this is not your personal belief, I suppose that is another thing.
Last edited by jriccitelli on Thu Nov 28, 2013 3:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
jriccitelli
Posts: 1317
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:14 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: Hell book complete

Post by jriccitelli » Thu Nov 28, 2013 12:50 pm

He has said in posts here that when they see Jesus they will all accept him (Me, this thread pg7))
If the "he" in this sentence is me, I would like to see where it was that this prediction was made. It is not one of my convictions, and it would surprise me if I had said it. That some might receive Christ when they see Him definitely seems possible—and I cannot even see why it would be controversial (Steve, this thread pg7)
Furthermore… can it be thought that these people have adopted this attitude having seen Him as He really is? ... The Calvinist believes in total depravity, and thinks that men are so evil that, even when they see God as He is, face to face, they will still hate Him… Can we imagine that seeing Jesus as He really is could fail to inspire such admiration? Do we not know a Jesus whom any sane person would love, were they to be stripped of all their prejudicial misconceptions about Him… (‘Barclay was convinced’ thread pg 17, Thu Dec 01, 2011)
Although I agree with your compassion on the lost, and I hope that post-mortem repentance is possible. It seemed to me that we knew what each other were talking about here was seeing Jesus post-mortem. I did ask you to elaborate, and made these comments;
Can we imagine that seeing Jesus as He really is could fail to inspire such admiration? (Steve pg.17 Ibid)
I don’t know if this is seeing Jesus in His Glory, or as a humble preacher. People did encounter Jesus in the flesh when he walked among Jerusalem and some loved Him and some did not. Even having done the miracles and being the messiah did not seem to be enough to convince many of those who saw him. (Me, 'Barclay was convinced’ Dec. 02 pg.18)
Do we not know a Jesus whom any sane person would love, were they to be stripped of all their prejudicial misconceptions about Him? (Steve pg17 Ibid)
I think humans are 'tested' on their 'own' prejudices, self assuring deceit, and their 'will', give or take their presuppositions. I encounter people who have a clear unclouded presentation of the Gospel, who understand it, know it and 'believe' it, yet still do not feel the want or need to embrace the Gospel. People do have to take personal responsibility for their own misinformation at some point, and some just don’t seem to ever want to take that responsibility no matter what evidence you present to them.
(Me, 'Barclay was convinced’ Dec. 02 pg.18)

Post Reply

Return to “Announcements”