I can remember when I was a kid, the mainstream Churches didn't believe there had been dinosaurs, they flatly disbelieved as life had started in its opinion, on this planet about 7000 years BC, that was the time of Adam.You'd go crazy if you took Bible stuff seriously, but to take it seriously, you'd already have to be crazy.
%%Oh, the NCV bible?
"The New Century Version of the Bible is a revision of the International Children's Bible. The ICB was aimed at young readers and those with low reading skills/limited vocabulary in English. It is written at a 3rd grade level and is both conservative and evangelical in tone.".
Other versions suggest that those who don't believe are "condemned already".
This "already" state of being suggests that "hell" is man's status quo as current condition rather than a future prosecution of a guilty verdict .
Even so it is worth questioning condemned by whom? Judged guilty already by whom?
I suggest that he'll is a king of self condemnation that does result from a disbelief in God's only Son so to speak. For if you believe that Adam was also God's son then you believe in more than one son...especially if you were to call mankind and it's legions also the "children of God".
Hell can be described as a kind of insanity for not believing in reality. That's really the clearest explanation.
God's "only Son" is a euphemism for the only reality or the only kind of reality that God promulgates either by "creation" (progeneration) or by abidance (accepting and living within reality). One ceases to abide in that reality by "disbelieving" in it, even though it is not something to be either believed or disbelieved but rather known or disowned (per parable of prodigal son).
The prodigal son LEAVES (is not originally exiled). Hence the pig sty that is hell is a voluntary phenomenon driven by temptation rather than a prison for something done against the original "kingdom".
As such, believing is only a small step on the many step journey home. First you've got to believe in the right conditions of reality as they are...not as you wish them to be in your imagination. Then you've got to step over a chasm between the phenomenon of faith to the knowledge of reality .
.
If you are writing about someone 60 years after they were supposed to have been alive, but you never met them, and there are no substantiated records whatsoever of their existence, and you describe them in terms that avoid the earthly but refer only to the heavenly, as the author known only as Paul did, then the whole account is in fact a fictional one.
Many other authors who similarly failed to name themselves 200 and 300 years later, take up the tale, expand, embellish, contort and promote it to use as an alternative religiously based political tool in order to attract and organize Jews away from their established beliefs, to radically oppose the Romans. Like Trump with the Republican party.
However it's quite possible the whole thing originally kicked off when Mary could only think of lying her way out of a situation. Again like Trump.
![]()
%%
OK, some modern versions are that way, because the reading level/comp of so many has fallen.
Where there is no vision the people perish. Proverbs 28 KJVAs far as evidence, I've had God heal me so many times, a sceptic 's opinion is simply bad eyesight, so to speak.[Psalm 107; 20, KJV, NCV
'Chasm..... to the knowledge of reality??'' Faith is the title deed, Hebrews 11:A, Amplified Classic Bible. A renter does not know about a real estate title deed, because he choses to not know about a title deed.For real estate buyers, all the renter hogwash, about a lack of a title deed [faith]= ignorance on display. Thanks
Who supposedly wrote what 2-300 years after?
authors who similarly failed to name themselves
200 to 300 years of changing New Testament stories is probably being generous.
For example in the earliest manuscripts of John's gospel, Jesus doesn't say "Let any among you who is without sin cast the first stone." That line appears much later in texts of the 2nd and 3rd centuries.
Similarly the author who wrote the Mark gospel story gets his tale completed for him later in the 2nd century by other anonymous authors.
etc etc etc
"the gospels we read today have been edited and corrupted over time, leading Origen [Origen Adamantius, early Christian scholar, ascetic, and theologian] to complain in the 3rd century that "the differences among manuscripts have become great, ... [because copyists] either neglect to check over what they have transcribed, or, in the process of checking, they make additions or deletions as they please" wikipedia
It is beyond naive (I won't say ignorant) to believe numerous authors weren't messing around with what would eventually be adopted as the New Testament Bible up to it being formalized in the 4th century (Codex Sinaiticus).
The impression given is one that the New Testament stories are authentic in every respect. Nothing could be further from the truth.