I’m just curious how far your literalism goes.

http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/history/chicago.stm.txt

I. SUMMARY STATEMENT

   5. The authority of Scripture is inescapably impaired if this total
divine inerrancy is in any way limited of disregarded, or made relative
to a view of truth contrary to the Bible’s own; and such lapses bring
serious loss to both the individual and the Church.

I hope that’s clear enough for you.

I feel we can safely accept the mission and purpose of Jesus and Paul without having to accept their 1st century worldview or the worldview of later Christians that developed the creeds and much of our theological history.

The Bible says so much about Heaven and Hell, but you so casually dismiss it. That is foolish. As I said before, and which you continue to show that I was correct, you set yourself over God, and make your own opinions as being more authoritative then what God’s Word plainly tells us, even to the point of saying Jesus spread lies about Heaven and Hell. Oh, you say he was only repeated his "first century worldview", but if Jesus is who He claimed He was, then He knew what was true and what wasn’t about Heaven and Hell, so for Him to talk about them as if they were real, for Him to tell the Sadducees that "God is not the God of the dead, but of the living" in regards to God being the God of Abraham, when in reality there was no afterlife for Abraham and he really was nonexistent, then you have in essence made Jesus a bigger liar the Satan.

Gee, speaking of the old Nick, who would stand to gain most by people not believe Jesus’ words? Who would be laughing his hellish head off when people call Jesus a liar?