The Widow’s Mite: Still a Burden

“And, taking his seat over against the treasury, he was observing how, the multitude, was casting in copper into the treasury, and, man rich, were casting in, much. 42 And there came, one destitute, widow, and cast in two mites, which are, a farthing. 43 And, calling near his disciples, he said to them—Verily, I say unto you, this destitute widow, more than they all, hath cast in, of those casting into the treasury; 44 For, they all, out of their surplus, cast in, but, she, out of her deficiency, all, as much as she had, cast in,—the whole of her living.” (Mark 12:41-44)

Jesus said that she gave “the whole of her living”. Many times when it came to the topic of giving, in general, and “tithing”, in particular; that I have heard preachers speak of this passage with a glow. This poor widow gave all she had. Her giving was much more than what the rich men had given. Jesus Christ said as much. Then, the exhortation is given from the pulpit to give. Give till it hurts. After all, that is what The LORD wants, correct?

Was Jesus happy to see this poor widow give the little bit she had; “the whole of her living”? Was she being faithful and “tithing”?  Was the widow bringing her “tithes into the storehouse”?

“Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings. 9 Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. 10 Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saiththe LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.” (Mal. 3:8-10)

The verse, above, is often used to guilt and strong-arm members of a church into writing checks and dropping cash into an “offering plate” on a consistent basis.  The word “tithe” is taught by most churches to be the obligation of a believer and should constitute 10% (tithe=tenth) of your income.  That is how the institutional “church” defines a “tithe”.  Of course, what is important is how the scriptures define a “tithe”.  See below:

“And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, is the LORD's: it is holy unto the LORD. 31 And if a man will at all redeem ought of his tithes, he shall add thereto the fifth part thereof. 32 And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even of whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the LORD. 33 He shall not search whether it be good or bad, neither shall he change it: and if he change it at all, then both it and the change thereof shall be holy; it shall not be redeemed.” (Lev. 27:30-33)

“And, behold, I have given the children of Levi all the tenth in Israel for an inheritance, for their service which they serve, even the service of the tabernacle of the congregation. 22 Neither must the children of Israel henceforth come nigh the tabernacle of the congregation, lest they bear sin, and die. 23 But the Levites shall do the service of the tabernacle of the congregation, and they shall bear their iniquity: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations, that among the children of Israel they have no inheritance. 24 But the tithes of the children of Israel, which they offer as an heave offering unto the LORD, I have given to the Levites to inherit: therefore I have said unto them, Among the children of Israel they shall have no inheritance. 25 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 26 Thus speak unto the Levites, and say unto them, When ye take of the children of Israel the tithes which I have given you from them for your inheritance, then ye shall offer up an heave offering of it for the LORD, even a tenth part of the tithe. 27 And this your heave offering shall be reckoned unto you, as though it were the corn of the threshingfloor, and as the fulness of the winepress. 28 Thus ye also shall offer an heave offering unto the LORD of all your tithes, which ye receive of the children of Israel; and ye shall give thereof the LORD's heave offering to Aaron the priest. 29 Out of all your gifts ye shall offer every heave offering of the LORD, of all the best thereof, even the hallowed part thereof out of it. 30 Therefore thou shalt say unto them, When ye have heaved the best thereof from it, then it shall be counted unto the Levites as the increase of the threshingfloor, and as the increase of the winepress. 31 And ye shall eat it in every place, ye and your households: for it is your reward for your service in the tabernacle of the congregation. 32 And ye shall bear no sin by reason of it, when ye have heaved from it the best of it: neither shall ye pollute the holy things of the children of Israel, lest ye die.” (Numbers 18:21-32)

“And the priest the son of Aaron shall be with the Levites, when the Levites take tithes: and the Levites shall bring up the tithe of the tithes unto the house of our God, to the chambers, into the treasure house.” (Neh. 10:38)

​As you can see from the passages above, money is not a tithe.  The scriptures define the tithe, specify that is only the tribe of Levi (“sons of Aaron”) who were commissioned to accept the tithe, and that it was for the children of Israel to provide the tithes.  So, to summarize, Gentiles were never given a command to tithe money to non-Levites.  So, where is the churches’ authority to not only command (on behalf of God) that tithes be paid to them by those who God never commanded to do such?  

​I challenge anyone to provide a passage in the scriptures showing where God changed the definition of an acceptable tithe, who was to provide it, and who was to accept it.  The tithe, served a very practical purpose.  It provided sacrificial animals for the Levitical temple service (sacrifices) and provided food for the tribe who was charged with the temple service, because they owned no land and raised no livestock, grains, or (to the dismay of the “wine is grape juice” crowd) fruits of the vine.

​If the institutional “church” wants to be at all consistent, why not resume animal sacrifice, dietary restrictions, and the like?  These were also commanded of the children of Israel and God never lifted these ordinances either.  This is a “pick and choose”, cafeteria-style approach to the law.

​One other important point should be noted when it pertains to preachers who use Malachi 3:8-10 as an indictment against people they believe to be “robbing God”.  Reading the entire book of Malachi brings out a very important detail.  This word from the prophet was not an indictment against the children of Israel for robbing God, by withholding tithes.  In multiple verses, God is speaking to the priests for “robbing God”, “polluting the altar”, and robbing “even the whole nation” due to the priests’ unfaithful actions.  But, it is almost a certainty, that you would hear a pastor preach the book of Malachi in context.

​The institutional “church” has to have the obligation of tithes placed on its members for very simple reasons.  The basic reason is that when the church departed from the truth (in the 1stcentury) it didn’t just depart from some truths.  It departed from almost all truth and set itself up as an institution, rather than an organic body of people.  Doubt me?  Most churches today are incorporated businesses that have a business/budget committee and pay salaries to staff, overhead expenses for buildings, real estate, endowment funds, loan service, etc.  Does any of this hold any resemblance to the early believers, who met in homes, in the countryside, etc. and each member taught doctrine, shared the gospel, and helped those in need?  I don’t believe so.  In fact, there is a very good book which goes into much deeper detail on the origins of the institutional church structure, entitled, Pagan Christianity?: Exploring the Roots of Our Church, by Frank Viola and George Barna.

​Earlier in the article, I mentioned the story of the widow’s mite, recorded in the book of Mark.  Like the passage from Malachi, this is another Pastor “go-to” passage to perform an “open sesame” on the congregation’s pocketbook.  It is effectively used by lifting the passage from its context.  

​Jesus is teaching and is at the temple, speaking parables (begin reading in Mark chapter 11) being challenged and asked questions by the Sadducees, Pharisees, and priests.  He is openly rebuking these religious charlatans.  By the latter part of Mark 12, he is walking with His disciples warning them to beware of them.  There is one particular and interesting charge He makes against them to the disciples, as He goes to stand by the treasury and watches the rich, and a certain widow, cast in “the whole of her living”.  See below:

“And in his teaching, he was saying-Beware of the Scribes, who desire, in robes, to be walking about, and salutations in the markets, and first seats in the synagogues, and first couches in he chief meals,-Who devour widows’ houses, and, for a pretence, are long in prayer: these, shall receive a more surpassing judgment.  And, taking his seat over against the treasury, he was made observing how, the multitude, was casting in copper into the treasury, and men rich, were casting in much.  And there came, one destitute, widow, and cast in two mites, which are a farthing.  And, calling near his disciples, he said to them-Verily, I say unto you, this destitute widow, more than they all, hath cast in, of those casting into the treasury; For, they all, out of their surplus, cast in, but, she, out of her deficiency, all, as much as she had, cast in,-the whole of her living.”(Mark 12:38-44)

​Throughout the Old Testament, Israel is admonished by God to take care of the widows and the orphans, and the strangers.  But, here, we have the one of the very ones who Israel was meant to take care of, having “the whole of her living” being taken away by religious burdens, imposed by the institution.  What is really interesting is what takes place in the very next chapter.  In chapter 13, Jesus and his disciples are leaving the temple and the disciples are looking in wonder and remarking about the beauty of the temple.  The Lord’s reply?

“And, Jesus, said unto him-Art thou beholding these great buildings?  In nowise, shall there be left here, stone upon stone, which shall, in any wise, not be thrown down.” (Mark 13:2)

​What a difference context makes.  When the passage is read in context, we see that the priests and scribes are known for “devouring widows’ houses”, along comes a widow and casts in all she has (the proof that they do this), and next Jesus prophecies the destruction of the temple and its system.  Hardly an endorsement, don’t you think?

​“Phillip, are you saying that we should not give?!”  Absolutely not ; we should give and give cheerfully, because God “loveth a cheerful giver” (2 Cor. 9:7).  Take a look at the passages below, where Paul is speaking with believers about helping out fellow believers who are poor in the Jerusalem church.

“For Macedonia and Achaia have been well-pleased to make a certain fellowship for the destitute of the saints who are in Jerusalem,-“ (Rom.15:26)

“Only that we should remember, the destitute,-as to which I had given diligence, this very thing, to do.” (Gal.2:10)

​Paul took up this collection of voluntary giving from believers who had, to give to those who did not.  Should we only give to those who are fellow believers?  No, we should give to any in need as the Spirit directs and use that as an opportunity to show God’s love in a practical way.  Paul says we should, as opportunity allows, do good to all; but especially of those of the household of faith (see Galatians 6:10).

​We should give in ways that impacts people and people’s actual needs, and does so in an effective manner.  Personally, I give to ministries which get the true gospel out there.  Two of the ministries I give to are very vocal that they are not  501(c) 3 organizations; meaning they are not tax-free entities/businesses.  These men’s ministries pay taxes out of what they are given.  That says a lot.  When it comes to helping others, I try to give to people directly, who have immediate, real needs.  Some of these people may or may not be believers.  It makes sense to me to give in a way that gives the most to the one in need without the gift getting a “haircut” to pay for a building, building expenses, salaries, etc.  But, to each; his own.

​The point is, give when and how you can, but don’t neglect your own obligations or the needs of your family.  Don’t “givetill it hurts”.  Be a cheerful giver; not making giving a burden.

​

​

The Serpent and Lying Pen of the Scribes

**Unlike most of my scripture references in other articles, the reader will notice that I reference the particular translation used in several places throughout this article.  This is done so that the reader may easily note the differences between two or more translations of the same scriptural passage.**

KJV “Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.” (John 8:51)

KJV ”And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this? (John 11:26)

The first lie that we are made known of in the scriptures was uttered by The Serpent, to Eve:

“And the serpent said unto the woman: Ye shall not surely die.”(Gen.3:4)

God, said that they WOULD die, if they ate of the one tree that He instructed them not to eat of; the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  As we read God’s instructions to our first parents, we read the following:

KJV “But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. (Gen.2:17)

​We know from the Genesis account that Adam did not die the day that he disobeyed God and ate of the forbidden tree.  Adam lived to be 930 years old, according to scripture (Gen.5:5).  What are we to make of God’s pronouncement that Adam would die “in the day” he first sinned against God?  The fact that Adam did not die as described (in the KJV and many other translations) is used to put for the false teaching that Adam died spiritually that day.  Theologians and pastors contend that Adam had to have died that day; therefore, since we know he lived well beyond that day, he must have died in a spiritualsense.  

​We will next examine why and prove why this is not the case; and build the case, that the spiritualization of death; is a form of Satan’s lie to our first parents (see above).  The spiritualization of death is expressed in phrases which cannot be found in scripture.  Some of these phrases include: “spiritual death”, “physical death”, “bodily resurrection”, “death of the body”, “immortal soul”, etc.

​In everyday language, these phrases and their underlying philosophies are found in sayings (when speaking of the dead) such as: “He is in a better place.”, “He went to be with the Lord.”, “He is walking the streets of gold.” Etc.

​While it is beyond the scope of this article to go into great depth as to answering what happens at death; from a scriptural perspective, below are just a few verses stating that death is a state of oblivion.

“For the living know that they shall die but the dead know not anything.” (Ecc.9:5)

“For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave, who shall give thee thanks?” (Ps. 6:5)

“For the grave cannot praise thee, death cannot celebrate thee: they that go down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth.” (Is.38:18)

“The soul that sinneth, it shall die…” (Ez.18:20)

“Men and brethren, let me speak unto you of the patriarch, David, that he is both dead and buried…” (Acts 2:29)

​

​When the scriptures speak of death and of resurrection, you will not find one, single, solitary instance in which death of the body, resurrection of the body, physical death, or physical resurrection is described.  In every instance, it is the death of the person, or the resurrection of the person.​

​When Adam sinned, did he die spiritually?  He couldn’t have because Adam was not spiritual, but soulish.  

Concordant “If there is a soulish body, there is a spiritual also.  Thus, it is written also, The first man, Adam,”became a living soul: the last Adam a vivifying spirit.  But not first the spiritual, but the soulish, thereupon, the spiritual.” (1 Cor. 15:45-46)

​Paul was speaking in this passage (what is known as “the resurrection chapter”) contrasting our earthly body with our heavenly body (to be exchanged in resurrection), and also contrasting the first Adam, with the second Adam, Christ Jesus.  Adam was not spiritual.  He was guided by the senses, emotions, etc.; thus, soulish.

​If we know that Adam lived well beyond the day he sinned against God, and that he did not die spiritually, how are we to understand Genesis 2:17?  The key is in the translation.  Below, is an accurate translation of the original Hebrew:

Concordant “Yet from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you are not to be eating from it, for in the day you eat from it, to die shall you be dying.”

​After Adam disobeyed God, he was barred from the path to the tree of life.  As long as Adam could eat from the tree of life, he would never die.  As a mercy, God blocked Adam’s path to the tree of life, so that he could not live forever in a corrupted state.  The King James Version (and most translations) do not say that “in the day you eat from it, to die shall you be dying”.  This is phrase is the figure of speech, “Polyptoton” (redundancy for emphasis).  It isn’t signifying that the death process starts, but saying that his death is a certainty.  

​In the New Testament, there is a particular phrase which Jesus Christ said on two occasions, which are NOT in the King James Version Bible; nor most any other translations.  I want to emphasize this.  There is a phrase (3 specific words) which on the two occasions that Jesus spoke it, most bible translators chose to omit it!  This isn’t an issue of mistranslating the phrase.  A noun wasn’t exchanged for an adverb here.  An English word that bears no semblance of meaning with the Greek was not substituted.  The phrase was just omitted from the scriptures, as if He had never spoken them.

​Below, are the verses in question as they read in the KJV and most translations.

KJV “Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.” (John 8:51)

KJV ”And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this? (John 11:26)

Below are how the verses read, translated correctly.  I provided one from the Concordant Version and one from the Rotherham.  Also, I have bolded the phrase which had been omitted by the King James Version.

Concordant “Verily, Verily, I am saying to you, If ever anyone should be keeping My word, he should under no circumstances be beholding death for the eon." (John 8:51)

Rotherham “And everyone who is living and believing in Me, should by no means be dying for the eon. Are you believingthis?” (John 11:26)

​There is a HUGE difference in the meanings when the King James Version (and almost all other translations) are compared with the two above.  Also, the phrase which Jesus spoke, and the translators chose not to include are definitely there.  You can check by going online and looking up the two verses in a Greek interlinear.  The Greek phrase, “eis ton aiona” means literally “for the eon (age)”.  

​Let me attempt to describe in a hypothetical conversation, just how big a deal this omission really is, when it comes to our understanding of what Jesus was speaking about.

​Imagine if you were warned by someone in authority and were told, “If you don’t arrive in time, you will never see your child.”  That is how the King James Version would handle the conversation.  Now, here is how the conversation, should have been handled, “If you don’t arrive in time, you will never see your child this afternoon.”

​Do you think there is a big difference between these two statements?  There is a very big difference between these two statements?  One states that you will never see your child and the other states that there is a given period of time that you will not see your child.  I would say that is a huge difference.

​Likewise, Jesus Christ meant something very different than what most translators want you to think He meant.  Christ’s earthly ministry was to Israel (Matt.16:24) and was about the next eon (age) to come.  He was speaking in the context of the age, when He returns to set up His kingdom on earth and how to have life in that age (eon).  Believers, who are resurrected to the kingdom, will live that entire age and never taste death again, because they will be made immortal.  They will also live beyond that age, because again, they are immortal and beyond the reach of death.  Paul speaks in 1 Corinthians 15 (the resurrection chapter) of how we will put on immortality.

​In contrast, the translators have made it seem that believers never die.  This harkens back to the lie of the Serpent, “Ye shall not surely die.”  All die.  That is because we are brought under the condemnation of death, brought by Adam’s disobedience.  Even so, we will be made alive because of Jesus Christ’s obedience.

“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” (1 Cor. 15:22)

​Scriptural understanding that death is the death of the person is fundamental to the gospel.  Most of the error in orthodox Christianity can be traced back to the belief in the first lie recorded.  If we fail to have a correct grasp of death, we fail to see what the wages of sin actually are, we make God a liar when it comes to our nature, we make there to be no practical difference between life and death, and finally, we fail to believe in the cornerstone of the gospel for salvation from death.  How can we believe that Christ died for our sins, if we don’t believe He really died?  

​The false doctrine of the immortality of the soul, denies the death of Jesus Christ, the person, the man.  Many times I have heard pastors say something to the effect that His body died, but that He was still alive and in Heaven.  This is a contradiction.  This is not sound words.  This is a denial of the truth and dishonest and deceptive translations of the Bible have aided in the deception.

​If we believe that the words Jesus Christ spoke were important, I think there is an obvious question.  Why did the translators (who read the two Greek phrases uttered by Jesus) ignore these phrases and choose not to include them in the Bible?  Jesus spoke the phrase twice, and the Pharisees (John 8:52) repeated it back to Him.  There is no explanation, other than the omission was intentional.  I see three possibilities as to why the phrase was intentionally omitted.  

a. The translators saw the problem that would be created if they translated the phrase containing “aion” as they translated it elsewhere.

b. The translators saw that this phrase was not in agreement with their theology.

c. (both, a. and b.)

The Greek word “aion” means “age”.  It is from this noun,“aion”, we derive the English transliteration, “eon”.  An eon is a period of time.  It can be definite or indefinite.  It is not endless, and it is not “eternal”.  However, most translators rendered it in that fashion.  “Aion” is almost never translated as “age/eon” in the King James Version.  “Almost never” is the key phrase here.  In the 165 times “aion” is used in the Greek New Testament, it is most often translated as “ever”, “never”, “world”, “for ever”, “evermore”, “everlasting”, and  “course”.  I wonder how a word could reasonably translated as both “ever” and “never”, but maybe my simple mind can’t just incorporate that a word can have one meaning and yet, another meaning that is antithetical to the primary meaning.

There are only 4 instances in the 165 times where “aion” is found in the New Testament, that it is actually translated correctly.  Two of the verses are provided below.  The other two are Ephesians 3:5;21.  

“That in the ages to come, he might shew the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.” (Eph.2:7)

“Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to His saints.” (Col. 1:26)

The translators, due to the plural form of the noun, were uniquely boxed-in to actually translating correctly in these two instances.  Otherwise, we would have been reading nonsense about the “forevers to come”, or “eternities”, or “nevers”.

You can see the potential problems created if the translators had included “eis ton aiona” when they have rendered it so poorly everywhere else.  You have a noun (aion), definite article (eis), and a preposition (ton).  Never mind, that in the instances the KJV translators made “aion” into “ever”, “for ever”, and “never”, they are turning a noun into an adverb, but they would really have to throw rules of grammar and syntax to the winds to render the phrase in question, consistently with what they have done elsewhere.  I think that the translators’ inconsistent and incorrect handling of the noun, “aion” certainly is a component, but I think the fact that the Lord’s phrase presented a real problem for their theology is the underlying problem.  The immortality of the soul doctrine was well entrenched by the time the translation of the King James Version was completed.  In fact, the immortality of the soul doctrine does not have its origination in Christianity.  This doctrine is a Pagan doctrine which has its roots in Babylonian and ancient Egyptian religion.  

Saint Augustine 354A.D.-430A.D. is probably most responsible for the Roman Catholic (and subsequently Protestant) teachings on the nature of man and the death state.  Augustine’s ideas on the soul were not so much informed by the scriptures, as by his philosophical views pertaining to Platonism and materialism.  In addition, based on much of his writing, it seems he often used “soul” and “spirit” as interchangeable terms; while the scriptures keep them distinct.

In Jeremiah 8:8, the Israelites believe they are knowledgeable for they have the written record of the Torah.  But, Jeremiah warns that they can’t claim that because, “thelying pen of the scribes hath handled it falsely”.  This is exactly what we have in many translations of scriptures.  The lying pen of the scribes has been used to teach and defend Pagan and unscriptural concepts, while artfully hiding and omitting the truth from those who search it out.

​

Of Soul Food and Baptist Confessions of Faith

Now, therefore, take I pray thee, thy weapons, thy quiver and thy bow, and go out to the field, and catch for me game; 4and make for me dainty meats, such as I love and bring in to me, that I may eat,—To the end my soul may bless thee, ere yet I lie!" (Gen. 27:3-4)

Isaac wanted SOUL food.  The terms "soul" and "spirit" have become so intertwined and convoluted that most do not know the difference.  Even Charles Spurgeon used the wrong word when he stated in the Baptist statement of faith that at death,

"The bodies of men after death return to dust, and undergo corruption, but their souls, which neither die nor sleep, having an immortal subsistence, immediately return to God Who gave them.

The scripture reference from Ecclesiastes 12:7 states that it is the SPIRIT, not the soul which returns to God.  There IS a difference.  

Christianity has made the soul immortal, when the scriptures state in Ezekiel 18:20 that the soul that sinneth, shall die.

Isaac, thinking he was near death, wanted comfort.  That is what "soul food" does.  It comforts, appeals to the senses, etc.  and that, is how the scriptures use the term "soul" figuratively.  "Soul" pertains to the senses, to emotion, to the flesh.

Look at the difference between "soul" and "spirit" as described by Paul.  In the KJV and many other translations, "natural" is the word you read, but it is actually the Greek word for "soul".  Check out the passage from 1 Corinthians 15, below in the Rotherham version:

"It is sown a body of the soul, it is raised a body of the spirit; if there is a body of the soul, there is also of the spirit:— 45 Thus, also, it is written—The first man, Adam, became, a living soul, the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. 46 Howbeit, not first, is the [body] of the spirit, but that, of the soul,—afterwards, that of the spirit. 47 The first man, is of the ground, earthy, the second man, is, of heaven: 48 As, the man of earth, such, also, the men of earth, and, as, the man of heaven, such, also, the men of heaven; 49 And, even as we have borne the image of the man of earth, let us also bear the image of the man of heaven. 50 And, this, I say, brethren,—that, flesh and blood, cannot inherit, God’s kingdom. Neither doth, corruption, inherit, incorruption." (1 Cor. 15:44-50)

Worship songs, sermons, etc which elicit an emotional (soulish) response are many times miscalled "spiritual", when they are actually appealing to the emotions and the flesh.

No, Jesus Did Not Preach More About Hell, Than Heaven

G3772-heaven (?)

G86 hades (4)

G1067 Gehenna (11)

There is the very popular (and completely incorrect) saying that hellfire and brimstone preachers have used for years, saying, "Jesus talked more about Hell than He ever talked about Heaven."

Let's see.

The gospel accounts in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are where we will find the words of Christ Jesus.  Now, even allowing for the horrible translation of a word (hades) which means "grave" into the word "hell", and the word "Gehenna" which is a valley, south of Jerusalem (not a place, 9 miles under the ground), we'll see the tale of the tape.

Jesus Christ used the two different words that were translated as "Hell", a grand total of 15 times!  Wow!  That is a LOT of times.  Surely, the Lord didn't mention "heaven" that many times.  I mean, a preacher SHOULD know, right?

Well, after the book of Matthew, I ceased my count.  That means that I didn't bother counting the number of times Jesus talked about heaven in the books of Mark, Luke, and John.  The Lord had used the word for Heaven, over 70 TIMES, JUST in the book of Matthew.

So, if any teacher says, "Jesus talked more about hell than he talked about heaven", you now can verify; that is utter nonsense...and you might just want to check behind that teacher on other things too.

By-the-way, the word "Ge-henna" which Jesus Christ said 11 times means "Ge" (Valley/ravine/ditch) of "Hinnom" (a proper noun/a man's name) and no occurrence of this word in the Old Testament is ever translated as "Hell".  When the Hebrew characters for "valley" and "Hinnom" are used in the Old Testament, it turns out that it is translated as "valley of Hinnom".

"Hades" which He said 4 times, is "the grave/the unseen/".  

When one is dead and in the grave, one is unseen because they are covered up and buried.  Did you know that the Old English word "hel" (which is part of the word "helmet") means "to cover".

"And, I also, unto thee, say—Thou, art Peter,—and, upon this rock, will I build my assembly, and, the gates of hades, shall not prevail against it." (Matt. 16:18) ROTHERHAM

Given that Christ Jesus is the Firstborn from among the dead and the firstfruits of resurrection to immortality, it makes sense that "Hades" means "the grave" and not some subterranean torture chamber.

There is only one verse in the New Testament in which "Hades" appears and the KJV translators, correctly rendered it as "grave".

"O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?" (1 Cor.15:55)

I am convinced that they only rendered it as "grave" in this single verse because to render it as "hell" in THIS verse would wreck their theology.

Is God Rational? A Search for Truth

A friend and I were talking about God and His purposes yesterday.  We are about the same age and we talked about how we NEED things to make sense.  God created man with an inherent sense of right and wrong (see Romans 2:14); a conscience.  We have a yearning for justice and bristle against unfairness.  Why?  We are made in God's image.  So, when things don't make sense to us; especially at a theological and philosophical level, our God-given intuition sounds an alarm bell.  "DANGER!!! DANGER!!! SOMETHING WRONG HERE!!!

As a teenager, growing up in a Southern Baptist church, I simply accepted things as "oh, well, it doesn't make sense but that's just how it is."  This was being lazy on my part and deciding to ignore the red flags my intuition and gut instinct were throwing up in front of me.  I did not understand how someone's "free" will could thwart the will of God.  But I assumed that it MUST be so because the preacher in front of me kept preaching about God giving man free will.  So, that HAD to be in the Bible, right?  I didn't understand how if God was the Potter and He molded vessels of honor and those of wrath, how it was the person's credit or detriment as to how they turned out.  That, "free" will thing again.  I didn't understand and it made no sense that a person who grew up not having ever believed because they never heard of Jesus was sent to "hell" upon death OR that one who never heard of Jesus went to heaven upon death out of ignorance (I heard preachers who would argue for one or the other view).

Acts 17 speaks of the Bereans and how they were more noble than the believers in Thessalonica.  The Bereans didn't just shrug their shoulders and accept things at face value.  They searched the scriptures to see for themselves if these things were so.

Some questions we have MAY be a mystery to us even after searching the scriptures.  This is certainly true as to WHY for example, God chooses one individual to be made a vessel of honor, while He chooses another to be made a vessel of wrath.  It is His sovereign choice and the reason is not given to us.  BUT, we are told that He will be merciful on ALL (Romans 11:32).  We are told that the same ALL who were given a death sentence due to Adam's disobedience are the SAME ALL who will receive justification to life because of Christ's obedience.  These things CAN be known.  They aren't a secret.  Scripture tells us.  Scripture tells us also what happens at death, where everyone "goes" when we die, who the Savior is and who "does" the being saved.

So, if you sit on a pew and you read scriptures which call God and Jesus "Savior" but THEN the pastor tells you that what saves you is a choice and decision YOU make, hopefully, that still, quiet voice will warn you "DANGER!!! DANGER!!! SOMETHING WRONG HERE!!!"

If that intuition kicks in, likely, God is telling you that something isn't right.  When scripture says that God's mercy endures and that God's wrath is but for a moment but THEN, your pastor says that most of creation will be tormented without end, HOPEFULLY, you will see a red flag.

Why do most NOT see a red flag?  As you may have guessed, scripture has the answer for that too!

"Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; HAVING THEIR CONSCIENCE SEARED WITH A HOT IRON;" (1 Tim.4:1-2)

Hopefully, you haven't heard so much of a FALSE gospel, that you have been inoculated from the TRUE gospel.