# One God, different names?



## Artfuldodger (Mar 15, 2015)

When reading about the ancient gods & goddesses people worshiped, they had different names for the same god or goddesses. Here is an example;

We've been saying for years that it was just a matter of time before the Babylonian chief goddess Ishtar (a.k.a. Inanna in Babylon, Isis in Eygypt, Astarte or Aphrodite in Greece and Libertas/Venus in Rome to name just a few) would once again rise to prominence in world affairs not merely in a mystical manner but in a bold, in-your-face resurgence of Ishtar’s many "mystical" doctrines.

Another example is Mercury was the same god as Hermes.

Would it be safe to say that the Universal God of the Universe or the "Great Architect" or "Creator" is the same God? That we just know him by different names? That none of us are excused from this knowledge?

I'm basing this on Romans 1:19-20

19because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Mar 16, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> When reading about the ancient gods & goddesses people worshiped, they had different names for the same god or goddesses. Here is an example;
> 
> We've been saying for years that it was just a matter of time before the Babylonian chief goddess Ishtar (a.k.a. Inanna in Babylon, Isis in Eygypt, Astarte or Aphrodite in Greece and Libertas/Venus in Rome to name just a few) would once again rise to prominence in world affairs not merely in a mystical manner but in a bold, in-your-face resurgence of Ishtar’s many "mystical" doctrines.
> 
> ...


I think we have to keep the time period in mind. At that time, they were asking to believe in "a one true God, creator of the universe". So this verse fits in that time period..... but not in ours. Because hundreds of beliefs have brached off this one tree


----------



## Lowjack (Apr 3, 2015)

Obviously the bible is Talking about , YHVVH The God of Israel , Father of Yeshua , not the pagan gods of Greek or Egyptian mythology or those fallen Angels who came to earth and passed themselves as gods,


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 4, 2015)

Lowjack said:


> Obviously the bible is Talking about , YHVVH The God of Israel , Father of Yeshua , not the pagan gods of Greek or Egyptian mythology or those fallen Angels who came to earth and passed themselves as gods,



I would agree as Greek mythology came years later than Judaism. What is the history of how Judaism received the information from Creation to recorded Judaism history?
I'm trying to understand how the God of Israel was God before he was the God of Israel. I understand he has always been the God of Israel but there hasn't always been an Israel.

I'm not trying to be smart but I just don't understand how the God of one nation wasn't a universal one God. Before Moses, there was no distinction between Jew and Gentile. 
We had people living all over the world. Who was their God before the "God of the Jews" became the "God of the Jews and Gentiles?"

I guess the main thing I don't understand is salvation for the world's Gentiles before he became the God of everyone.


----------



## GunnSmokeer (Apr 17, 2015)

If you can believe / understand the "trinity" of one God but  existing in three different "persons" (The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit) and still call yourself a monotheist, I don't know why you wouldn't accept that other religions pray to the same God, even if they don't correctly understand who God is.  Even if they don't accept all the "persons" of the Godhead (and all the different facets of God's personality).  Even if they reject God's prophets and teachings and have a different set of writings or oral traditions that they call "scripture."


----------



## gtparts (Apr 21, 2015)

The distinction of any deity, real or imagined, depends on the characteristics of that particular entity. With Christianity, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are in total agreement. The unity is fully consistent, without exception. Therefore, "Sh'ma Yis'ra'eil Adonai Eloheinu Adonai echad"(Hear, Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One). Though some will refute this truth, that the GOD of Abraham is the same GOD of the Christian faith, the first century Jewish converts understood this based on the continuity, the consistency, and the prophesy of the Scripture.

Also take note of the detailed character of the Judeo-Christian GOD.

Holy, loving, just, the author of everything, the judge of all things, forgiving, eternal, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient.

Now, examine the very nature of all other deities. The contrasts are unquestionably so divergent, so different from the Judeo-Christian GOD.

The very idea that there is only one deity with different names is beyond laughable.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 23, 2015)

gtparts said:


> The distinction of any deity, real or imagined, depends on the characteristics of that particular entity. With Christianity, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are in total agreement. The unity is fully consistent, without exception. Therefore, "Sh'ma Yis'ra'eil Adonai Eloheinu Adonai echad"(Hear, Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One). Though some will refute this truth, that the GOD of Abraham is the same GOD of the Christian faith, the first century Jewish converts understood this based on the continuity, the consistency, and the prophesy of the Scripture.
> 
> Also take note of the detailed character of the Judeo-Christian GOD.
> 
> ...



Romans 1:19-20
19because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 

How does the God of Abraham make himself known to people in foreign jungle villages and islands by the correct name? They are without excuse to not no him. They only know him by his eternal power and divine nature. Will God hold it against them that they didn't know he was the God of Abraham?


----------



## JJhunts (Apr 24, 2015)

Great thread, clearly everyone's comments are well thought out and all reflect genuine points of view. The tendency to frame religions in terms of the differences will always result in the same outcome. Division and strife. An honest conversation about the SIMILARITIES would better enable us to a greater understanding of each others faith(and our own in the process). There is a growing secular movement that threatens all faiths yet we are sadly divided.

Coincidentally I just spent the weekend fishing with the Author of the Celistine Prophesy and the 12th Insight, two novels about spiritual journeys where these topics are central. 

Caught 56 bass in 3 days, Eluded by the big one though


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 24, 2015)

JJhunts said:


> Great thread, clearly everyone's comments are well thought out and all reflect genuine points of view. The tendency to frame religions in terms of the differences will always result in the same outcome. Division and strife. An honest conversation about the SIMILARITIES would better enable us to a greater understanding of each others faith(and our own in the process). There is a growing secular movement that threatens all faiths yet we are sadly divided.
> 
> Coincidentally I just spent the weekend fishing with the Author of the Celistine Prophesy and the 12th Insight, two novels about spiritual journeys where these topics are central.
> 
> Caught 56 bass in 3 days, Eluded by the big one though



If I caught 56 bass in 3 days, I'd be happy the big one got away.


----------



## Madman (Apr 27, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> I'm not trying to be smart but I just don't understand how the God of one nation wasn't a universal one God. Before Moses, there was no distinction between Jew and Gentile.
> We had people living all over the world. Who was their God before the "God of the Jews" became the "God of the Jews and Gentiles?"



He was God, the universal God.  Go back and re-read Genesis.  He didn't choose Israel to be their God and no one else's God, He chose Israel for a purpose.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 27, 2015)

Madman said:


> He was God, the universal God.  Go back and re-read Genesis.  He didn't choose Israel to be their God and no one else's God, He chose Israel for a purpose.



I guess people around the world knew the one universal God by different names. I've read Yahweh and El-Shaddai as God's name but those sound Jewish.
How or by what name did God reveal himself to the non-Jewish world? 
I'm not doubting the one Universal God. I'm just trying to see how he revealed himself or made himself known to the rest of the world.


----------



## Madman (Apr 30, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> I'm just trying to see how he revealed himself or made himself known to the rest of the world.



For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Romans 1:20


----------



## Artfuldodger (Apr 30, 2015)

Madman said:


> For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
> 
> Romans 1:20



I quoted this verse earlier and is the reason for my question;
By what name has God used to define himself to these worldly Gentiles living in far away lands?
Why did the middle east leading up through Noah, Shem, and Abraham get the story but not other parts of the world? 
It's like the Jews and people in that area received the divine Word but the rest of the world only received the Word by God's creation. 
Unless they received it and lost it along the way somehow.
It's hard to deny the Jewish connection of the God of Abraham related to the Word, the Great mystery, the Gentiles, and "after the Cross."

Colossians 1:26-27
26that is, the mystery which has been hidden from the past ages and generations, but has now been manifested to His saints, 27to whom God willed to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.


----------



## Day trip (May 4, 2015)

The difficulty that many have is that they separate religion and God from daily life.  If we recognize God in nature then we can learn to recognize God in a more mystical/spiritual manner.  If you drop an apple, it falls to the ground.  If you drop an apple a thousand times, it falls to the ground a thousand times.  We have just personally discovered something about nature that is also a part of God.  If we drop an apple and it remains suspended, we do not throw away our theory of gravity but we consider that we don't know as much about Gravity as we thought.  We assume some outside source has acted upon the apple to create the variation.  Then over time with thought and experience, we discover why, in that one situation the apple remained suspended and we grow in knowledge.  Knowledge of our universe, knowledge of God.  We learn to trust and rely on these observations.  They can be counted on.  The same thing happens with our personal relationships, how we love.  When we act justly, we are at peace, regardless of the outcome because we are acting according to the laws of God.  The laws of the soul.  As we continue to live and experience life, we do things right and we do things wrong.  If we are foolish, proud, we fail to learn from our mistakes.  We fail to recognize The Godlessness of our actions.  If we are humble and act through love we discover that we are acting through God.  

There is one God.  There are many false gods and many views of the one true God from different points of view and many personal experiences.  Very often these views seem foolish because you have a different perspective.  Very often these views are immature and pretty weak but that doesn't mean their is no value to them.  

Even With no knowledge of "the God of Isreal" we cannot deny that apples dropped will almost always fall and we cannot deny that if we act justly, we are untouchable.  Maybe not our bodies but our souls.  God is love. Love not given away dies.  Our very existence is an expression of Gods love.  We are to recieve his love but not to store up or keep.  We are to be conduits of Gods love, to recieve it and pass it on and by doing so, that love grows exponentially.  No man can deny Gods truth.  Only a fool would say the apple on the ground didn't fall after watching it do so. Only a fool would deny any truths of the soul that they have discovered.   To do so would be a sin against the Holy Spirit, the unforgivable sin.  Mankind can deny Jesus because if one does not understand his teachings, he is not meant to understand it.  To deny Jesus (his teachings, his very life) is forgivable because some people just don't get it or have never been exposed to it.  Jesus was given to us as a guide to make our understandings of life, of God MUCH easier.  When one reads a teaching of Jesus and it reaches his soul, it becomes truth, a gift of the Holy Spirit and then that truth is undeniable.  It would be an unforgivable sin to say otherwise.  Just like the man who now understands why the apple didn't fall that one time,  even though it is a rare and subtle variation, he cannot deny the principles existence or he denies truth.


----------



## Day trip (May 5, 2015)

To say "my God" or "your God" is only an attempt by the ego to satisfy itself.  "You believe different things than me, therefore I am right and you are wrong."  From your point of view, if you are being honest, your point of view is right albeit limited.  And from his point of view, if he is being honest, his point of view is right albeit limited.  Now of course this takes into play all of those who are not being honest but you will know them by their deeds and actions.  
All of these names for gods throughout history are (or should be if we are to consider them) microcosmic views of God from different cultural, environmental and knowledge based points of view.  Instead of discrediting other names for God because we use different titles, determine if you can understand the goodness and love that is in it.  If not, leave it alone, you are not ready but if you can gain even an ounce of wisdom from these other points of view, doesn't it expand your knowledge and wisdom?  Why would we deny that.  So many claim the "one true religion" because their egos are burning and cannot bear the fact that someone may know something that we don't.  Apparently God chose Abraham because he saw that Abraham was ready.  So he gave him the laws.  Mankind followed these laws as a guide toward God but it was known from the beginning that laws cannot lead one to God.  It requires a repentance.  A changing of ones mind.  And again when God saw that mankind was ready, he gave us the Christ in his human form of Jesus to further our education.  Now we again try to rebuild laws and rules and sacraments and rites to honor God.  Many not realizing the the purpose of all these "regulations" are to lead to repentance.  These procedures, in themselves are of no value.  As if we could do enough or be good enough to please God.  That is a pagan notion.  Part of our animalistic nature to worship something.  It is baby food for the immature.  We must mature beyond that stage to realize that we honor God every time we act in accordance with nature.  His love flows through us and we, along with the entire universe grows.  When we fail to see and abide by truth, we disrupt that flow of love, injuring ourselves and all of creation at the same time.  
God is real.  Just because you don't care to recognize someone else's point of view or give credit for the truth that you see in your lives every day does not discredit that.


----------



## Artfuldodger (May 5, 2015)

Day trip said:


> To say "my God" or "your God" is only an attempt by the ego to satisfy itself.  "You believe different things than me, therefore I am right and you are wrong."  From your point of view, if you are being honest, your point of view is right albeit limited.  And from his point of view, if he is being honest, his point of view is right albeit limited.  Now of course this takes into play all of those who are not being honest but you will know them by their deeds and actions.
> All of these names for gods throughout history are (or should be if we are to consider them) microcosmic views of God from different cultural, environmental and knowledge based points of view.  Instead of discrediting other names for God because we use different titles, determine if you can understand the goodness and love that is in it.  If not, leave it alone, you are not ready but if you can gain even an ounce of wisdom from these other points of view, doesn't it expand your knowledge and wisdom?  Why would we deny that.  So many claim the "one true religion" because their egos are burning and cannot bear the fact that someone may know something that we don't.  Apparently God chose Abraham because he saw that Abraham was ready.  So he gave him the laws.  Mankind followed these laws as a guide toward God but it was known from the beginning that laws cannot lead one to God.  It requires a repentance.  A changing of ones mind.  And again when God saw that mankind was ready, he gave us the Christ in his human form of Jesus to further our education.  Now we again try to rebuild laws and rules and sacraments and rites to honor God.  Many not realizing the the purpose of all these "regulations" are to lead to repentance.  These procedures, in themselves are of no value.  As if we could do enough or be good enough to please God.  That is a pagan notion.  Part of our animalistic nature to worship something.  It is baby food for the immature.  We must mature beyond that stage to realize that we honor God every time we act in accordance with nature.  His love flows through us and we, along with the entire universe grows.  When we fail to see and abide by truth, we disrupt that flow of love, injuring ourselves and all of creation at the same time.
> God is real.  Just because you don't care to recognize someone else's point of view or give credit for the truth that you see in your lives every day does not discredit that.



Is God's plan of salvation for Abraham and his lineage the same plan for the whole world? Can God elect the Hindu? How does the far away isolated Gentile hear of Christ if he must follow God's plan for Abraham?
The mystery of Christ revealed to the Gentile?


----------



## Artfuldodger (May 5, 2015)

Ephesians 3:5-7
5which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit; 6to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel, 7of which I was made a minister, according to the gift of God's grace which was given to me according to the working of His power.

This mystery that Gentiles were fellow heirs wasn't revealed until the apostles and prophets revealed it. Were the Gentiles heirs before the mystery was revealed? In other words they were heirs all along, they just didn't know it.


----------



## Day trip (May 5, 2015)

The elect.  How careful we must be with that notion.  It does not mean that I'm in and you are out.  The elect have a much larger responsibility to mankind.  The knowing must clear the air so that the others may see more clearly.  God is present to all men at all times, we just fail to recognize the common, the regular actions of each day as the fantastic feats that they are.  We want miracles that astound, that are impossible to mankind so we can then idolize.  That is mans nature, the flesh.  The spirit recognizes the routine and regular as great acts of God.  They follow his way, the way of Christ and see true miracles- perfection of our oneness with God, even if just for a brief moment.   So yes, even the Hindus cannot deny truth.  Their perspective is different from ours and they do not have the blueprint which is the Christ, but if you study their seemingly far out notions carefully, you can recognize small parts of the gospel in their teachings.  Can you imagine how hard it would be to build a temple without the blueprint?  It can be done but with many more mistakes and lots of effort.  Heck, even with the blueprint, we Christians foul it up!


----------



## JimD (May 5, 2015)

That was very good Day trip and I feel much the same as you stated.


----------



## gtparts (May 5, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Romans 1:19-20
> 19because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
> 
> 1. How does the God of Abraham make himself known to people in foreign jungle villages and islands by the correct name?
> ...



(Took the liberty of numbering your questions.)

1.  Initially, (given the limitations set forth in your question) God is not overly concerned about being addressed by a particular name. He wants people in that position to recognize that He is and that they are not God, nor having any significant power of their own. Whether God extends His revelation further depends on Him and those who worship Him in truth.

2.  The only thing that condemns a person in that position is their rejection of the God revealed in His creation. God holds all responsible for what they been graced to receive. Faith in God was the means of salvation before the Messianic coming of Jesus. It is still the way in which anyone receives salvation. Jesus' coming was the Kingdom of God brought to Earth, the ultimate revelation and expression God to mankind. 

Some see this reality as two different dispensations, but faith in God is the key element that bridges time from beginning to eternity.

Blessings to all,

gtparts


----------



## apoint (May 25, 2016)

God told you his name. What is the confusion?


----------



## RH Clark (May 25, 2016)

Don't worry my friend. The God of the whole universe is a just God.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 26, 2016)

Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus*, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 

May I suggest that if one subs Christ Jesus for God,  or The Creator, The Source, The Spirit of all Creation and The Life Unnamed...etc those who walk after the Spirit, in lieu of the Flesh are not condemned by error. Of course not all do this, as similarly not all Christians walk faithfully after the Spirit of Christ.

Man has a carnal mind when he makes numerous divinities to act as  if in a drama-- and then proceeds to worship them according to the scripts he has made for himself. Yet, nature  as unity, viewed in relationship with its different components is a teacher, as if intended, when man reflects on his condition against it in a sacred manner.

Some Hindus say of Christians that they should be more Christlike and less Christian. That they do understand Christ but Christians are enigmatic... They understand what it is to walk after the Spirit, just as Christ did, but it is not always to be witnessed in Christians sadly.


----------



## RH Clark (May 28, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus*, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
> 
> May I suggest that if one subs Christ Jesus for God,  or The Creator, The Source, The Spirit of all Creation and The Life Unnamed...etc those who walk after the Spirit, in lieu of the Flesh are not condemned by error. Of course not all do this, as similarly not all Christians walk faithfully after the Spirit of Christ.
> 
> ...



To walk after the spirit does not mean what you think it means. Most will take this verse to mean to walk without sin, yet that is not the meaning for it is the flesh that has such thoughts. 

The carnal mind cannot comprehend the things of God so it can only see the flesh, the good or the bad of the flesh. This is why to be carnally minded is death, for the carnal mind cannot accept justification by faith alone, and there can otherwise be no justification. The flesh will never be good enough, never be sinless, and so the carnal mind is death.

To walk in the Spirit is to know and understand Justification by faith in Jesus, this is why there is therefore now no condemnation. The next few scriptures plainly say that you are in the Spirit and not in the flesh if the Spirit of God dwells in you. So therefore walk according to the Spirit, accept Justification by faith knowing that Christ dwells in you.

It's the knowing of who you are that will cause you to walk in a more holy lifestyle. Walking by the flesh and judging yourself by your flesh will only result in death, for where there is no understanding of justification by faith in Jesus , there is no faith. If you can only see yourself and judge yourself by your flesh, then where is your faith?


----------



## Israel (Jun 6, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus*, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
> 
> May I suggest that if one subs Christ Jesus for God,  or The Creator, The Source, The Spirit of all Creation and The Life Unnamed...etc those who walk after the Spirit, in lieu of the Flesh are not condemned by error. Of course not all do this, as similarly not all Christians walk faithfully after the Spirit of Christ.
> 
> ...



I am believing you refer to Ghandi's famous quote.
But, what is found there that that remains the central rub for all? Is it not that line of distinction...that very thing manifestly expressed outwardly...of that thing at work inwardly?
The words might be hard to deny, they do not merely come to Hindus observing Christians...we might easily find them here, amongst ourselves...at times. Do we not?



> Two men stood down the road from one another. "Where are you?" they hollered.
> 
> The one said "I am near the bend by that tall oak"
> The other said "I can barely see that, it's shrouded in fog."
> ...




Who clearly sees both?


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 6, 2016)

Israel said:


> I am believing you refer to Ghandi's famous quote.
> But, what is found there that that remains the central rub for all? Is it not that line of distinction...that very thing manifestly expressed outwardly...of that thing at work inwardly?
> The words might be hard to deny, they do not merely come to Hindus observing Christians...we might easily find them here, amongst ourselves...at times. Do we not?
> 
> ...



In all fairness I suppose, many Hindus might understand Jesus to be a Hindu, a great swami... not unlike the New Agers who make out Jesus to be one.

Gandi saw the brits as culture busters, not doubt, because they were.


----------



## Israel (Jun 10, 2016)

Though no man owns the Christ, he may be disowned.
Though no man owns his brother, he may be disowned.


----------



## RH Clark (Jun 12, 2016)

Israel said:


> Though no man owns the Christ, he may be disowned.
> Though no man owns his brother, he may be disowned.



I thought you were in the predestination crowd? Is it your position that Christ can be rejected but can't be chosen?


----------



## Israel (Jun 17, 2016)

Everything occupies the position assigned it by God.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 21, 2016)

Israel said:


> Though no man owns the Christ, he may be disowned.
> Though no man owns his brother, he may be disowned.



How so? That no man owns the Christ? A member of the body  other than the head does not own the head?

If a person has Christ in their heart, in their mind they own not Christ?

How do you use the word own bros.? Does not Christ belong to his people as a King belongs to a people?

To disown a brotherhood, does not diminish the fact that brothers are just this despite what one might understand the relationship to be.???

own= belonging to

Even if we de-personify God, as some would prefer,  is not this sublime grace added to our consciousness and therefore in our possession, acquired and owned?

If God gave his son  ( For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.)----;

To whom did He give his son? Or this is a fable? God is owned by no one, because God is not and one that is cannot own what is not?


----------



## Israel (Jun 22, 2016)

Remain in Me, and I will remain in you. Just as no branch can bear fruit by itself unless it remains in the vine, neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in Me. I am the vine and you are the branches. The one who remains in Me, and I in him, will bear much fruit. For apart from Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not remain in Me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers. Such branches are gathered up, thrown into the fire, and burned.…


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 22, 2016)

Israel said:


> Remain in Me, and I will remain in you. Just as no branch can bear fruit by itself unless it remains in the vine, neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in Me. I am the vine and you are the branches. The one who remains in Me, and I in him, will bear much fruit. For apart from Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not remain in Me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers. Such branches are gathered up, thrown into the fire, and burned.…



Ah!


----------



## RH Clark (Jun 24, 2016)

Israel said:


> Remain in Me, and I will remain in you. Just as no branch can bear fruit by itself unless it remains in the vine, neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in Me. I am the vine and you are the branches. The one who remains in Me, and I in him, will bear much fruit. For apart from Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not remain in Me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers. Such branches are gathered up, thrown into the fire, and burned.…



Your translation would make it seem as if Jesus will cast you away if you aren't good enough, or not quite to the abiding level. That is not the meaning of John 15 at all. You are either in Christ or not in Christ. Those who are in Christ "abiding" will not be cast away.

In verse 2 of John 15 the KJV says: 
2 "Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit." That too is a poor translation. The word translated as "taketh away" is the word "airo" which literally translates as "to lift".  Lifting a branch that does not bear so that it can bear fruit is a common practice. To translate "airo" as "taketh away" causes anyone to assume that the "taketh away" from verse 2 is the same as those who are cast into the fire who do not abide in Christ from verse 6.

In verse 6 Jesus makes the distinction that those who are burned are not abiding in him. We however with our sin consciousness sometimes try to make the scripture say that those in him who sin are cast away, or perhaps just those who are in him but do not quite measure up to the abiding level are cast into the fire. That mentality however does not agree with other scriptures like Heb.13:5 that says Jesus will never leave nor forsake us, or Romans 8:35-39.


----------



## Israel (Jun 25, 2016)

There is no mention of the lake of fire, nor is there mention of being eternally lost.
There is no implication that even the vine branch ceases to be a vine branch. It speaks to that which such a branch may experience.
But what there is, is plainly stated. (To me at least, in this regard)

That the vine is the sustainer of the branch. And that is in no way contrariwise, that is that the branch is what makes the vine what it is.
If I have chosen a poor illustration for discussing the nature of relationship and ownership, I suppose I could have better stayed with Gordon's own illustration. The hand does indeed belong to the body, and the body is indeed identified by the head to which it belongs. As such the hand may be given to say "I belong to this body"...and in such, "to belong to=to own", might have some reasonable use in explanation.
But the useful hand never confuses itself with the head to the extent that it "forgets" (and seriously painful experiences ensue, if it does) that it therefore assumes, by belonging to "that body" with which it is identified, that it is now suitable to be the head of all instruction to that body.
A man is shown to be owned less by what he says about himself belonging to anything by his words of "I am of this or I am of that" than the letting of the head, which alone knows what is part of "its own body" do with him as it will...for it knows what it owns.
And, what is...its own.


----------



## gemcgrew (Jun 25, 2016)

Israel said:


> Remain in Me, and I will remain in you. Just as no branch can bear fruit by itself unless it remains in the vine, neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in Me. I am the vine and you are the branches. The one who remains in Me, and I in him, will bear much fruit. For apart from Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not remain in Me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers. Such branches are gathered up, thrown into the fire, and burned.…


This is a promise.

"I am like a flourishing cypress; in me will your fruit be found."

"Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God."


----------

