Was Jesus really tested by Satan? - Part #3. Double Devil, Double Impact!

Friends,

It is said in the Bible that God has set limits for the seas and oceans ordered seas not to cross those limits. It is a sad fact that many Christians think that God has set some limits for their brains and expect them not to breach those limits. God has given us gray matter within our skulls and expects us to use them. In fact God challenges us to use our reasoning power:

Isa 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD:

Isa 41:21 Produce your case, says the LORD; bring forth your strong reasons,...

God doesn't expect us to shift our brain cells to neutral before studying the scriptures.

I am sure that everyone has read the following passages, over and over again, but most of them without understanding the implications.

Joh 6:70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil [G1228]?

Joh 6:71 He spake of Judas Iscariot ...

Jesus didn't say 'one of you is like devil', instead He said: 'one of you is a devil. The Greek word used here is diabolos (G1228 in Strong's) which Jesus equated to Satan in Mat 4:10 and Luk 4:8. See also: Rev 12:9; 20:2.

So, as per the words of Jesus, Judas Iscariot is a devil or Satan. Now, read this:

Luk 22:3 Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.

Judas was already a devil, now, Satan has entered into him.

• Does Satan entering into Devil make Devil more Devilish? OR more Satanic?
• If Satan is an entity, how will it enter into itself?
• If a human being like Judas could be a devil, what warrants that devil or Satan is a celestial being?

Friends, God wants us to reason passages like this. We are asked to discern.

The character of Judas Iscariot.

You are familiar with the narrative of a woman named Mary anointing the feet of Jesus with expensive perfumes and Judas protesting about it, asking why it was not sold and given to the poor? In that context we are told:

Joh 12:6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.

Judas was after money, though his master's teaching was:

Luk 16:13 No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

Needless to say whom Judas served.

Was Judas politically disillusioned?

That's what scholars say. Do we have any evidence of such claims? If he were having political ambitions and was in fact disillusioned, he should have aligned himself with some political formulation that lines up with his political views. We do not see any such move from Judas. What we see is Judas going to the Jewish priests - who had already determined to kill Jesus - and talking about money.

Mat 26:14 Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests,

Mat 26:15 And said unto them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver.

Mat 26:16 And from that time he sought opportunity to betray him. (See also: Mar 14:10, 11; Luk 22:3-6)

Why "Satan" had to enter during the time of Passover?

As per Christian traditions, Jesus and the disciples were together for at least 3½ years. There could have been 2-3 Passovers within that period. Why this Satan character decided to enter Judas during Jesus' last Passover? Why it could not decide on some other, earlier occasion?

We are told of Jesus' celebrating only the last Passover. Before proceeding to Jerusalem, Jesus intimated His disciples that He would be killed there.

Mat 16:21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

It is obvious from Mat 16:21 that Jesus used to repeatedly tell his disciples about what was then to befall him. In fact, Jesus gave the precise date on which he was to be killed:

Mat 26:2 Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.

As the keeper of the money bag (Joh 12:6), Judas is sure to know what would be left in the bag after the Passover celebrations are over. Obviously, Judas was keen on garnering as much money as possible within the short period of time available. So, Judas knew where the money is.

Friends, greed, love of money, can bring the worst out of a man.

1Ti 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

As regards money, Jesus was a stark contrast to Judas. Jesus cared the least about money. He solely relied on divine provision. I am sure that you remember the incident where Jesus asks Peter to go to sea, catch a fish and take out the coin in its mouth and use it to pay taxes. (Mat 17:27)

End of greed: a story with multiple ends.

There are two endings to the story of Judas.

Story #1:

Mat 27:5 And he [Judas] cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.

Mat 27:6 And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood.

Mat 27:7 And they took counsel, and [chief priests] bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in.

Mat 27:8 Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day.

Alternate Ending:

Act 1:18 Now this man [Judas] purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.

Commentators are at great pains to explain away evident discrepancies in these two passages. They say Luke's account in Acts 1 is less accurate. Their explanation of how the body of a man who committed suicide by hanging can fall headlong (with the head foremost) amounts to absurdity. The body of someone who has hung himself to death can fall downward, but not headlong.

Mat 27	Acts 1
Judas threw the money in the temple and priests took it.	Judas did not throw the money in the temple.
Chief priests bought a field.	Judas bought a field. (a person who is remorseful and about to commit suicide by hanging won't wait for purchasing a piece of land.)
Judas hanged himself.	Judas fell headlong and died. (Even if the body of a person who committed suicide by hanging has to fall and burst its belly, it has to be decomposed. But, Jews won't allow a dead body to be hanging beyond sunset. So, there is no possibility of the body decomposing. Another explanation is that there may have been some javelin or spear onto which the body fell. You have a dead body hanging from a tree. There is a spear planted in front of it. How probable it is that the decomposed body will fall exactly on the spear? Frankly, the theory does not add up!)

It does not take a celestial monster called Satan to do what Judas did. Whatever stands against the mind of God is adversarial to God. The story of Judas is a very good lesson on what greed can do to a child of God!

May all the glory be to God and His Christ.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

The Satan Myth: Wasn't FEAR Simon Peter's Satan?

Friends,


As I was thinking about the two passages involving Satan and Simon Peter, it occurred to me that the Satan of Simon Peter was FEAR. Here is an attempt to convey my thoughts to you, as effectively as I can.

Simon Peter was fearful man, not a sinful one!

Simon Peter is one of the most interesting characters of the Bible. He had all the making of a commoner. Have you noticed Simon Peter's response to Jesus Christ in one of their initial encounters?

Simon and his friends had a bad day at sea, having caught hardly any fish. Jesus entered his boat and asked him to let down the net into the deep. And while they dragged the net back into the boat, it was filled with a large number of fish so that the net was about to burst and the boat was about to sink. Simon was astonished to the extent that he fell at Jesus' feet and told Him: "Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord." (Luk 5:1-8) Don't you think his response was almost similar to the response of the people of Gadarenes, after Jesus healed Mr. LEGION of his demon possession?

Of the twelve apostles, it was Simon Peter, who volunteered to walk on water towards Jesus who was approaching the boat, walking on water. After the initial enthusiasm, fear set in as he saw a violent wind approaching and started to sink. (Mat 14:26-31) Had Simon a valid reason to be afraid of? On a previous occasion while they were on a boat and Jesus calmed a violent storm, was not Peter among the apostles who were astonished at the act? (Mat 8:23-27)

It is because of his raw innocence, I say he was a commoner, as ignoramus and fearful as the rest of the Galileans.

Satan's sifting of Simon Peter as wheat.

While we say that there is no entity named Satan, people ask: didn't Satan seek permission to sift Simon Peter as wheat? They have no coherent answer for the question: whom did Satan seek permission from? Let us read the passage (from the King James Version) and attempt to understand the proceedings.

Luk 22:31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:

Luk 22:32 But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.

Obviously, what Jesus mentioned as Satan's sifting as wheat is a test of faith, that's why Jesus said He has prayed that Peter's faith should not fail.

From Jesus' words did Simon Peter understand that a celestial monster with forked tongue, forked tail and a trident standing in front of him to sift him as wheat? NO! Have you noticed his reply?

Luk 22:33 And he said unto him, Lord,I am ready to go with thee, both into prison, and to death.

He understood Jesus was hinting at the likelihood of his being arrested by the authorities, which may lead to situations where he may lose his faith.

After these comes the well known statement by Jesus:

Luk 22:34 And he said, I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me.

As we all know, thrice did Peter deny knowing Jesus, exactly as Jesus said. Why? One may argue that Satan prompted him to deny Jesus. I am not sure about other places, but we in India fear getting arrested and won't even hesitate to deny our beloved ones in order to escape an arrest. Does Satan prompt us to do so? No, it is our fear of getting arrested makes us do so. The adversary is not a celestial monster, it is fear. 

While gripped by fear, Peter would have forgotten Jesus' instruction: fear not them which kill the body (Mat 10:28)

Jesus anticipated Peter losing his faith and deny Him, that's why Jesus said: when thou art converted[G1994], strengthen thy brethren. The Greek word translated as converted means: 'return', 'turn around', 'turn back' and 'to turn'. Simon Peter was supposed to strengthen his brethren after turning back from loss of faith.

Assuming that a celestial evil being called Satan sought permission to sift Peter like wheat, whom will it seek permission to?

1. God? It cannot be, because Jesus said He saw Satan falling from heaven, well before this event (Luk 10:18). 
2. Even if Satan sought and obtained permission from God, is it likely that Jesus would pray against the will and good pleasure of His own father?
3. If Satan did indeed seek permission from God, it appears Satan's appeal was heard and Jesus' prayer was unheeded, because Simon Peter was indeed sifted like wheat, and lost his faith in Jesus.
4. If #3 is true, how can we be confident that our prayers to the heavenly father, through Jesus Christ be heard?

Personification

While God said Cain: 'sin is lying at the door. Its desire is for you', could God have meant that sin is a living being, like a dog, to be lying at door? While it is said that 'Wisdom has built her house...', is it implied that wisdom is a person?

My point is: Satan seeking / desiring to sift Peter as wheat does not make Satan into a person or an entity.

Get behind me, Satan.

Simon Peter could be a Spirit filled man at one moment and a carnal man in the very next one. Jesus was elated and excited while Simon announced that Jesus is the Christ:

Mat 16:15 He [Jesus] saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

Mat 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

See the excitement of Jesus:

Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. (Read verses 17 and 18 as well)

But, Jesus' excitement was short-lived, in the very next minute Peter became Satan! In other words, fear gained the best of Peter, this time around, not the fear for his own life, but that of Jesus.

Mat 16:21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

Mat 16:22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

Mat 16:23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men

Overtaken by fear, he fell from the position of a Spirit filled child of God to that of a carnal man. Immediately after addressing Peter as Satan, Jesus explains what makes him Satan: Peter's thinking is that of carnal men and not in line with that of God.

In the verses that follow Jesus explains how one should esteem Him above one's own life.

Mat 16:24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

Mat 16:25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.

I am sure that you are reminded of the axiom: 'perfect love casts out fear'. (1Jn 4:18)

The transformation of Simon Peter.

If the fearfulness of Peter was incredible, equally incredible was his transformation after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Please read the address of Peter to the Jewish council in Acts 4.

Act 4:5 And it came to pass on the morrow, that their rulers, and elders, and scribes,

Act 4:6 And Annas the high priest, and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest, were gathered together at Jerusalem.

Act 4:7 And when they had set them in the midst, they asked, By what power, or by what name, have ye done this?

Act 4:8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel,

Act 4:9 If we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole;

Act 4:10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.

Act 4:11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.

Act 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Act 4:13 Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.

Please remember that it was the same council and the same Annas and Caiaphas that Peter feared at the time of the arrest and trial of Jesus.

Please note Peter and other apostles' reply to the high priest:

Act 5:27 ... the high priest asked them,

Act 5:28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.

Act 5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

Finally, the same Peter who was fearful and was afraid of being arrested, rejoiced because he and the apostles were found worthy to be persecuted because of the name of Christ.

Act 5:41 And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name.

Conclusion:

• Simon Peter was a fearful man and not a sinful man.
• Jesus' mentioning of Satan seeking to sift Peter like was a figurative way of telling that his faith would be tested.
• Just as he feared for his life, he feared Jesus' life, and on both the occasions Jesus mentioned about Satan.
• In relation to Peter, Satan stands for fear and not any celestial monster.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

If HaSatan (HaSawtawn) is a proper name, why HaBarber, HaTreasurer, HaQueen and HaAstrologer cannot be?

Friends,

[If you are reading this post on a device with a small screen or on a device that has no Unicode support, I suggest you switch to a device that has a larger screen and Unicode support, as this post has quite a few Hebrew words in it. You need not to know Hebrew language, all that you need to do is to recognize the pattern. Full text of Hebrew verses are not provided here, as I do not expect my readers to be good at Hebrew. You can verify the things presented here against any unaccented Hebrew Bible.]

Theologians and Bible scholars know that the Hebrew word translated as Satan means 'an adversary' or 'a rival' or 'an opponent', rather than a celestial monster with a trident, forked tongue, and a forked tail. But, admitting it openly would prove detrimental to their theology and of course, their careers. They had to come up with a solution. They observed that in the Hebrew text of the books of Job and Zechariah the word appears prefixed with the Hebrew letter named He (ה - the 5^th alphabet, pronounced as Ha). So, they assumed that a common noun like 'an adversary' can become a proper name when prefixed with Ha.

Presently, many ordinary Christians, who are hardly good at the grammar of their own native tongues, will tell you how HaSatan is different from a plain vanilla adversary or opponent.

[In case if you are not familiar with the difference between proper names and common nouns: America, India, Tomsan Kattackal and Duncan Heaster are proper names, whereas, 'father', 'blogger', 'software developer', 'teacher', 'preacher', etc., are common nouns.]

Here is the Strong's definition of the Hebrew word translated as Satan:

H7854 שׂטן (śâṭân, saw-tawn')

From H7853; an opponent; especially (with the article prefixed) Satan, the arch enemy of good: - adversary, Satan, withstand.

[Please ignore for a moment Strong's claim that a common noun when prefixed with a definite article can become a proper name. If the theory were true, then "the teacher" or "the policeman" should be proper names. That is not how grammar works. Strong's lexicon is a concordance of the King James Bible and not a dictionary of Hebrew language.]

The very first time this word is used in the Bible is in the context of the angel of the LORD blocking the way of Balaam, who was proceeding to meet Balak:

Num 22:22 ... the angel of the LORD stood in the way for an adversary [H7854,לשׂטן,] against him.

(In Num 22:32, the same form of the word is rendered as 'withstand' - which is wrong, because the word is a noun and not a verb)

Throughout this post the prefixes and suffixes are shown in different colors. Please remember that Hebrew is read right-to-left and hence prefixes appear rightmost. In the above verse שׂטן stands for 'adversary' and ל (Hebrew letter Lamed) is the prefix.

The same form of the word is used in 1Sa 29:4, where Philistines doubt that David (who was an ally of the king of Achish) will betray them and may turn out to be an adversary.

1Sa 29:4 ... let him not go down with us to battle, lest in the battle an adversary [H7854,לשׂטן,] to us: ...

Such prefixes are used throughout the Hebrew text, because of grammatical requirements.

The same word is used in its base form in the following passages:

1Ki 5:4 But now the LORD my God hath given me rest on every side, so that there is neither adversary [H7854 שׂטן] nor evil occurrent.

1Ki 11:14 And the LORD stirred up an adversary [H7854 שׂטן] unto Solomon, Hadad the Edomite:..

1Ki 11:23 And God stirred him up another adversary [H7854 שׂטן], Rezon the son of Eliadah... (See also: 1Ki 11:25)

In all these cases, the word points to a plain vanilla adversary and not any cosmic monster.

The base form of the word rendered as Satan.

Though Strong's Lexicon told us that the Hebrew word when prefixed with a definite article becomes a proper name pointing to 'the arch enemy of good', the very first time the word is translated as Satan, the corresponding Hebrew text has no prefixes at all.

1Ch 21:1 And Satan [H7854: שׂטן] stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

If Strong's theory is correct, what prompted the translators to render this passage differently from the passages we have considered above?

Here comes HaSatan!

From the very beginning of the Book of Job, the Hebrew word indicated by H7854 appears with a prefix of the Hebrew letter 'He' (ה, pronounced as Ha).

Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan (H7854 השׂטן) came also among them. (The same pattern is followed in Job 1:6, 7, 8, 9, 12; 2:1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7;)

"Scholars" and Strong's lexicon tell us that when prefixed with Ha, the word that means "an adversary" will become a proper name - HaSatan. The way we are indoctrinated, we may be inclined to believe that their theory is correct. Conspicuously, these HaSatan passages happens to be exactly those passages which are traditionally thought to be referring to a celestial monster called Satan, with horns, forked tail and a trident.

If prefixing Ha to common nouns can make them proper names, we will have proper names like HaBarber, HaAstrologer, HaTreasurer and so on (albeit in their Hebrew forms).

In the table below is a list of ten common nouns prefixed with Ha. [Please note that in Hebrew language when a common noun is suffixed with 'eem' (ים) it becomes the plural form of the word. ]

James Strong (if he were alive) and Biblical  will have to explain how these (and many more) common nouns won't become proper names when prefixed with Ha, unlike the word rendered as Satan.

Strong's #	Word	Verse	KJV text	Hebrew text	Plural
H825	אשׁף	Dan 1:20	the astrologers	האשׁפים	✓
H970	בחור	Jdg 14:10	the young men	הבחורים	✓
H1377	גבירה	1Ki 11:18	the queen.	הגבירה
H1489	גזבר	Ezr 1:8	the treasurer	הגזבר
H1532	גלב	Eze 5:1	barber's	הגלבים	✓
H1616	גלב	Exo 23:9	strangers	הגלבים	✓
H1771	דיג	Isa 19:8	the fishers	הדיגים	✓
H2259	חבל	Jon 1:6	the shipmaster	החבל
H2400	חטא	Num 16:38	sinners	החטאים	✓
H2748	חרטם	Gen 41:24	the magicians	החרטמים	✓

Altogether there are 26,286 occurrences of 2,262 distinct words prefixed with Ha. These include nouns, verbs and adjectives. I have examined only a third of these words. There are common nouns like ass, ax, bull, camel, captives, child, cypress, daughter, fir, fire, flesh, gentiles, hillock, idol, iron, knee, lamb, maid, meat, men, onion, pool, son, virgin, women ... prefixed with Ha. Imagine the scenario where all these are treated as proper names like HaAss, HaBull, HaCamel, HaChild ...

Conclusions:

• The theory that a common noun when prefixed with a definite article can become a proper name makes no sense.
• The proponents of the rule have violated their own rule in the interpretation of 1Ch 21:1
• Theologians and Bible scholars have to realize one thing: they cannot delude people forever: with Computers and the availability of Hebrew Text in Unicode format, even a not-so-smart software engineer can write a few lines of code that can prove their theories wrong.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Satan Myth: What about LEGION, the man who was possessed by many devils, Tomsan? - Part #1

Friends,

You may read about LEGION or the man who was supposed to be possessed by many devils in Mat 8:28-34, Mar 5:1-19 and Luk 8:26-36.

⓪ Difference in Details.

An unprejudiced reading of the three passages mentioned above reveals quite a few differences in details.

1. While Mark and Luke mentions a man possessed by devil, Matthew mentions two men.
   Mat 8:28 ... there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs,...
   Mar 5:2 ... there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit, (See Luk 8:27)
2. Please note that "possessed with devils", "had devils" and "with an unclean spirit" are used interchangeably.
3. Mark starts out with "unclean spirit" (singular) and switches to "unclean spirits" (plural) later on: Mar 5:13 ...And the unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine: ...
4. Only Mark details the uncontrollable nature of the man - Mar 5:3-5
5. Only Matthew mentions about the demon possessed man saying that Jesus came "before the time" (cf Mat 8:29 with Mar 5:6, 7 and Luk 8:28)
6. Matthew does not mention Jesus seeking the name of the man/men possessed by devil. So, the name Legion does not appear in the gospel of Matthew. (See Mar 5:9 and Luk 8:30)
7. In Matthew's gospel, the demon possessed man does not seek Jesus not to sent out of the country. (See Mar 5:10, Luk 8:31)
8. Matthew does not tell us the villagers who came to the scene were afraid on seeing the man (men) who was healed. (See Mar 5:15, 16; Luk 8:34, 35)
9. Matthew does not tell us about the healed man requesting Jesus to take him along with Him or Jesus telling him to go back to his people and testify for what God has done for him. (See Mar 5:18, 19; Luk 8:38, 39).
10. Both Mark and Luke tell us that the man was in his right mind after he was healed. (Mar 5:15; Luk 8:35)
11. Please note that the Greek language used in the New Testament doesn't have separate words for he, his, him, she, her, they, them, their and it. αὐτός (pronounced as autos, G846 in Strong's Lexicon) is translated as aforementioned words. So, English expressions like "he said to him", "he said to them" and "they said to him" have almost same Greek text. This can be very confusing for both the translators as well as us.
12. Though the King James Version (KJV) renders several Greek words as devil, διάβολος (pronounced as diabolos, G1228 in Strong's Lexicon is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word translated as Satan)
13. The Greek words rendered as "devil" in the three passages that we discuss here are: δαιμόνιον (pronounced as daimonion, G1140 in Strong's) and δαιμονίζομαι (pronounced as daimonizomai, G1139 in Strong's). The appropriate English translation of these words is demoniac or demoniacs (demon possessed - these words are not related to diabolos). Reading the same passages in English Standard Version (ESV) or Young's Literal Translation will make it clear to you that the appropriate translation is demoniac or demon-possessed.

① The Symptoms.

Let me tell you upfront that the man in question was a Schizophrenic, rather than someone possessed by devils. Before presenting the scriptures, let me present you the definition of Schizophrenia:

Schizophrenia (/ˌskɪtsɵˈfrɛniə/ or /ˌskɪtsɵˈfriːniə/) is a mental disorder often characterized by abnormal social behavior and failure to recognize what is real. Common symptoms include false beliefs, unclear or confused thinking, auditory hallucinations, reduced social engagement and emotional expression, and lack of motivation. Diagnosis is based on observed behavior and the person's reported experiences.

Now, here is what the scriptures tell us:

Luk 8:27 And when he went forth to land, there met him out of the city a certain man, which had devils long time, and ware no clothes, neither abode in any house, but in the tombs.

Luk 8:29 ... For oftentimes it had caught him: and he was kept bound with chains and in fetters; and he brake the bands, and was driven of the devil into the wilderness.

This man, let us call him Mr. Legion, not wearing clothes, and dwelling in tombs and wilderness - instead of houses, shows his abnormal social behavior - some of the symptoms of Schizophrenia. Though schizophrenics are not generally violent, the insensitive behavior of people around them may force them to become violent.

② The swines question.

While we say that Mr. Legion was in fact a schizophrenic, people retort: if it be so, what did go into the swine? They consider the swine to be a necessary prop for Jesus to heal Mr. Legion. Let us examine the scriptures to see whether there were anyone else with the same ailment as Mr. Legion.

Compare this description about Mr. Legion:

Luk 8:27 And when he went forth to land, there met him out of the city a certain man, which had devils[G1140] long time, and ware no clothes, neither abode in any house, but in the tombs.

with this one about Mary Magdalene:

Luk 8:2 And certain women, which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils[G1140],

There were situations where large crowds gathered around Jesus, with demon possessed people along with other sick people.

Mar 1:32 And at even, when the sun did set, they brought unto him all that were diseased, and them that were possessed with devils[G1139].

Mar 1:34 And he healed many that were sick of divers diseases, and cast out many devils[G1140]; and suffered not the devils[G1140] to speak, because they knew him.

• If swines were a necessary prop in healing the demon possessed, do you really think all these people brought as many swines as the number of devils they are possessed by, while coming to be healed by Jesus?
• How are they supposed to know how many devils have possessed them?
• If someone like Mary Magdalene were among the crowd, could she have brought 7 pigs so that the 7 devils that possessed her can be sent to them?
• How about hundreds of demon possessed people bringing many hundreds of swines? Won't the atmosphere be filled with grunts (oinks) of swines?
• Do Jews rear pigs?
• If the devils or unclean spirits that leaves a person has to enter into another, we can't visualize what they will enter into in a large, unruly crowd. What if they enter another human being?

The point is: swines or pigs were not necessary in healing demon possession.

You may ask: Why did Jesus sent the so-called unclean spirits to swines? Let me ask you this: we read about Jesus spitting into the eyes of a blind man in order to heal him. (Mar 8:23) There were many blind people who were healed by Jesus. Did He spit into the eyes of each one those whom He healed?

Most importantly, it was not Jesus' idea to send the unclean spirits to the pigs, it was suggested by the unclean spirits.

Luk 8:32 And there was there an herd of many swine feeding on the mountain: and they besought Him (Jesus) that he would suffer them to enter into them. And he suffered them.

We can safely say that it was part of the false beliefs, unclear or confused thinking of a schizophrenic.

Are we not told that Jesus healed the demon possessed by His word?

Mat 8:16 When the even was come, they brought unto him many that were possessed with devils:[G1139] and he cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick:

Jesus is the Word of God and He could heal people with His power and His word, without the help of spittle or swines!

... Continued in part #2

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Satan Myth: What about LEGION, the man who was possessed by many devils, Tomsan? - Part #2

Friends,


This is part #2 of "What about LEGION, the man who was possessed by many devils?". If you haven't read part #1, please read it before proceeding.

③ How about devils speaking some heavy doctrinal stuff?

One of the serious issues that many have regarding Mr. Legion episode is the devils addressing Jesus as 'Son of the most High God'. Let us see who really uttered those words:

Mat 8:29: And, behold, they [the two men - vs 28] cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?

Luk 8:28 When he [a man] saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high? I beseech thee, torment me not.

So, it was the man (men, according to Matthew) who uttered those words.


Someone asked me: how can a schizophrenic know that Jesus is the son of the Most High God? My answer is: a schizophrenic is not an imbecile or a retard. Scripturally, the fame of Jesus was spread abroad throughout the region, right after His testing by the devil:

Luk 4:14 And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee: and there went out a fame of him through all the region round about. (See also: Mar 1:28)

Interestingly, of the 4 New Testament occurrences of the expression the most high God, 3 are associated with people possessed by Devil. (Mar 5:7; Luk 8:28 and Act 16:17). The remaining one appears in Heb 7:1, where Melchisedec is mentioned as the priest of the Most High God, alluding to Gen 14:18.

It is an irrefutable truth that Jesus is the Son of God. If the devils that have possessed these men are from Satan - who is a liar and the father of lies - will they utter a truth?

Joh 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil [G1228 - diabolos - Greek equivalent of Satan], and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it [Please note that the Greek word translated as devil in the verse above is none of the words we have encountered previously.]

 ④"Right Mind" v/s "Wrong Mind"

Both Mark and Luke tell us that the man who was healed by Jesus was seen sitting at the feet of Jesus in his right mind.

Mar 5:15 And they [people from the neighborhood] come to Jesus, and see him that was possessed with the devil, and had the legion, sitting, and clothed, and in his right mind: and they were afraid. (See also Luk 8:35)

Is it not reasonable to think that a person who is in his right mind after being healed was in his "wrong mind" ("out of mind") before being healed? Does it not imply that the man or men in question had a mental disorder? This is another reason we say that Mr. Legion was a schizophrenic.

⑤ Popular myths.

• Many who have studied the narrative about Mr. Legion have come up with a theory that there was Roman legion (military unit) near Gergesenes and the usage of the word Legion was in reference to that legion. They say that unlike normal legions where there are 5,000 to 6,000 members, this one had only around 2,000 members in it. Unfortunately, there is no proof for this theory.
• Some believe that Mr. Legion was possessed by 2,000 devils, as many as the number of swine.
• In my view, if Mary Magdalene could be possessed by seven devils and Mr. Legion could be possessed by many devils (Mar 5:9), why there is a rule that the pigs can be possessed by only one devil each? What if each pig was possessed by 7 devils each? (No, I am not saying that the pigs were possessed, I am just questioning their reasoning.)
• Another theory is that Jewish priests used to wash their hands in a laver (cup or basin) after healing someone possessed by devil. According to them, pigs running headlong into the nearby waters is symbolic of this washing. This, again, is a meaningless argument, because, if such a practice existed, Jesus was in the role of the priest and it was He who had to wash His hands, and not the pigs.
• If there used to be a practice of washing hands after healing someone possessed by a devil, how Jesus would have managed washing his hands while He was healing hundreds of such people? (Mar 1:32, 34)

Friend, while Jews said that Jesus had a devil, all that they meant was that Jesus was out of mind, as can be understood from the context:

Joh 10:20 And many of them said, He hath a devil[G1140], and is mad; why hear ye him?

Similarly, while they said that John the Baptist had a devil, because he didn't eat or drink, all that they meant was he was mad or crazy. Don't we use such expressions?

⑥ Conclusion - who were really mad?

The extremely disappointing part of the narrative is the response of the public while they saw the man who was previously possessed by devil in his "right mind".

Mar 5:15 And they come to Jesus, and see him that was possessed with the devil, and had the legion, sitting, and clothed, and in his right mind: and they were afraid.

Previously, while he was in his "wrong mind" also they were afraid and would not venture anywhere near him. Even after his regaining his sanity, they were afraid. Frankly, my friend, such ignoramus people are more insane than those who are termed as insane. As I initially told you, schizophrenics are not generally violent, it is the ignoramus people around them that make them violent.

If there be any typos in this post, kindly intimate me.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal
 

A snippet on the nature of resurrection.

Friends,




Recently I was speaking to a friend who had doubts about the nature of resurrection.

Me: how will you know whether someone has resurrected? 
He: If we check their tombs and if the person is not there we will know that he/she has been resurrected.

Let me develop on this topic. In the first century church there were two men who overthrew the faith of some people by saying that the resurrection is already over.

2Ti 2:17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; 

2Ti 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. 

Of these two men, Hymenaeus was a real concern for Paul. On another occasion Paul talks about Hymenaeus shipwrecking the faith of many and hence was delivered to Satan (1Ti 1:19, 20).

If the first century church was looking forward to physical resurrection of the dead, Paul could have told them: Guys, please go and check whether your near and dear have resurrected, instead of listening to Hymenaeus and Philetus. Please go to Jerusalem and see whether David is still in his tomb. (Act 2:29)

If their expectation were physical resurrection, there were physical ways of proving that it has not happened and Hymenaeus and Philetus were wrong. It does not take rocket science to prove that.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Jude 1:4, a passage misused to disgrace the preaching of grace.

Friends,

Those who oppose the teaching of grace use Jude 1:4 as their strongest argument against it. Let us read the verse together:

Jud 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. 

Who / what is the subject of the statement? Is it "grace" or "certain men"? Obviously it is "certain men".

It says that these "certain men"

• who were before of old ordained to this condemnation ...
• are ungodly men
• turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness
• denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Does the passage say that: 

• these "certain men" are preachers of grace?
• the preachers of grace are "before of old" ordained to condemnation?
• the preachers of grace are ungodly men?
• the preachers of grace are lascivious?
• the preachers of grace deny only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ?

Every preacher of grace knows that grace flows from God through Jesus Christ.

 

The passage is about some people who deny Our God and Our Lord Jesus Christ and who were "condemned from before of old". Is there any way to prove that all the preachers of grace are condemned of old - from long ago? We have heard about terms like "elected from the foundation of the world" and "predestination". Does this passage say that all the preachers of grace are predestined to to be condemned? Absolutely not!

 

The passage is about the deniers of God and Jesus Christ - no sane Christian would ever deny God and Jesus Christ. The passage is about someone else who matches the criteria of Antichrist.

 

I wish grace deniers learn to read the scriptures analytically.

 

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Did LORD fulfill the Land Promises made to Abraham?

Friends,

There is a popular concept among Christians that Jehovah has not fulfilled the land promises made to Abraham. I am sad to say that this concept is the result of not studying the scriptures thoroughly. Most of the Christians' study of the Old Testament ends with the book of Exodus. There are many who haven't studied books like Ezra and Nehemiah. A thorough study of the scriptures can dispel many misconceptions.

Here is the land promise LORD made to Abraham (then Abram). 

Gen 15:18 In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates: 

Gen 15:19 The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, 

Gen 15:20 And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, 

Gen 15:21 And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites. 

There are many who claim that LORD has not fulfilled this land promises. They claim that this has to be fulfilled in the future. Here is a map of the land promises made to Abraham, taken from the website of someone who says that the land promises are not fulfilled.

Please refer back to this map as you read the scriptures that I quote below.

As I study the Bible (I use KJV) I see definite fulfillment of the land promises in the Old Testament times. I present three testimonies here, because the scriptures tell clearly that any dispute should be settled by 2 or 3 witnesses (Deu 19:15, Mat 18:16).

Witness ①

Jos 21:43 Thus the LORD GAVE TO ISRAEL ALL THE LAND THAT HE SWORE TO GIVE TO THEIR FATHERS. And they took possession of it, and they settled there. 

Jos 21:45 NOT ONE WORD OF ALL THE GOOD PROMISES THAT THE LORD HAD MADE TO THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL HAD FAILED; all came to pass.

This is after Israel under Joshua crossed over Jordan and towards the end of the tenure of Joshua. If you have any doubts please check the concordance for the words translated for all [H3605] and land [H776].

Witness ② 

1Ki 4:21 SOLOMON RULED OVER ALL THE KINGDOMS FROM THE EUPHRATES TO THE LAND OF THE PHILISTINES AND TO THE BORDER OF EGYPT. They brought tribute and served Solomon all the days of his life.

Unless one can find some technicalities, this encompasses the same stretch of land promised to Abraham in Gen 15:18-21.

Witness ③

Neh 9:7 You are the LORD, the God who chose Abram and brought him out of Ur of the Chaldeans and gave him the name Abraham. 

Neh 9:8  You found his heart faithful before you, and made with him the covenant to give to his offspring the land of the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Amorite, the Perizzite, the Jebusite, and the Girgashite. AND YOU HAVE KEPT YOUR PROMISE, FOR YOU ARE RIGHTEOUS.

This is Nehemiah's narration of the righteousness of the LORD and he says the LORD kept his promise.

I have no doubt in my mind that whatever was promised to Abraham is fulfilled and for me 3 witnesses are more than sufficient.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Hell appears to be a hi-tech city!

Friends,

You need to analyze the concept of hell logically and scientifically. I will give you the key verse for such an analysis:

Mar 9:48: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

Most of the worms that we know of will die if you pour brine (salt water) or boiling water on them. They will die in the heat of even something as simple as a lighted match stick.

Hi-Tech City, Hyderabad

Another important point is: if you are working in an environment where the temperature is extremely high, you won't be able to concentrate on your work. So, these worms should be made of heat resistant material like tungsten (which has a melting point of 3414°C or 6177.2°F).

While grilling meat the oven is set at 71°C to 76°C (160°F to 170°F). If the temperature is above this the meat would get burned up. So, God has to ensure that the heat should not exceed this range; otherwise the sinner would become charcoal within minutes and eternal torture would become impossible.

Even while cooking meat at this controlled temperature, if you cook it for long, again, the meat would get burned up. If the meat is 2 inches thick, grilling would be done in 2 to 2½ hours, maximum. Since a human being can be 12 inches thick, let us allow 12 to 15 hours. Beyond this the sinner would become charred and dead. But that situation will not allow eternal conscious torment.

In order to avoid the sinner getting over cooked and charred, God may use coolants once in every few hours of grilling and ensure that the sinner is hale and healthy to face the next session of grilling.

In any case, after a few hours of grilling the skin of the sinner would be burnt up, as we see in the case of grilled chicken. Once the skin is lost the sinner would lose the sense of heat, at least, partially. Further eternal torment would not be of much effect. So, God has to ensure that the sinner regrows his skin. It is also quite possible that there are some skin transplant units in hell.

Since the sinner has no more skin, where will the skin to be transplanted come from? So, I think God has made something like a stem cell manufacturing unit in hell where human skins matching each sinner’s blood group and other parameters are produced. There will also be plastic surgeons that are capable of conducting skin grafting using these manufactured human skins.

If you don’t mind my quoting from Quran this type of skin grafting is mentioned it:

"We shall send those who reject Our revelations to the (Hell) Fire. When their skins have been burned away, We shall replace them with new ones so that they may continue to feel the pain: God is Almighty, All-Wise." [4:56]

Challenges do not end there. Skin cannot be grafted on to cooked flesh. So, God has to heal the cooked flesh, which has no life in it, back to live flesh. Probably, again, hell may have advanced stem cell grafting technology. This may require air conditioned intensive care units in hell.

More than 45-48% burns can cause death. So, God should have provided for some sort of monitoring system to ensure that the sinner is not burned beyond that point. If he/she dies how there can be eternal torture? In my knowledge we don’t have any such technology available as of May, 2015.

How about reducing the temperature in hell by 50%? No, that cannot be, because that would bring the temperature down to 35°C to 38°C (95°F to 100°F), which is almost near to the normal body temperature of a human being: 37°C  (98.6 °F). It would also be the same as the summer temperature in Bangalore.

Wow! It takes a lot of technology and scientific advancement to maintain a placed called hell.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

.

Do Americans elect an Antichrist every 4ᵗʰ year?

Friend,

Starting with Franklin D. Roosevelt almost every president of the United States has been termed as Antichrist at some point of time or other. There could be various reasons for this practice.

Not only American presidents, many political leaders, heads of the nations, religious leaders have been termed as Antichrist. Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, Hitler and many more were termed as Antichrist.

The criteria of terming someone as Antichrist appears to be simple: anyone who opposes our political or religious views could be termed as an Antichrist.

This may raise a few eyebrows, but it is sad fact that this whole business of pointing fingers at one's opponents as Antichrist was started by none other than Martin Luther, who was a seminal figure in the Protestant Reformation.

Here is Martin Luther's definition (identification of Antichrist):

We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist...personally I declare that I owe the Pope no other obedience than that to Antichrist." (Aug. 18, 1520) ~ The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 2., pg. 121 by Froom.

(In all probability, some Catholics may have considered Martin Luther or even the entire Protestantism as the Antichrist.)

What does the Bible say about Antichrist?

The only NT author who used the word Antichrist is Apostle John. (1Jn 2:18; 1Jn 2:22; 1Jn 4:3; 2Jn 1:7).

Timing of the appearance of the Antichrist:

1Jn 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, EVEN NOW ARE THERE MANY ANTICHRISTS; whereby we know that it is the last time. (capitalization is mine).

1Jn 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and EVEN NOW ALREADY IS IT IN THE WORLD.

I am sure you will agree with me that Apostle John did not write his epistles in the 20^th or 21^st centuries.

The Greek word used for "now" (νῦν, G3568) is always translated as "now", "present time", "this time", "this world" ... and NEVER translated in any futuristic sense. Same is the case with the Greek word translated as "already" (ἤδη G2235) and it is always translated as "already", "now" ...

So, the Antichrist was present right in the first century, as John was penning his epistles. Needless to say, we have to honor the audience relevance. It makes absolutely no sense for Apostle John to tell his first century audience that "even now there are many Antichrists" if the Antichrist were to appear much later. I am pretty sure that Roman Catholic Church did not exist in the first century. While I have no love for Roman Catholic Church, the claims of the likes of Martin Luther that John had RC in mind while writing this verse is bad exegesis and poor discernment!

Characteristics of the Antichrist:

1Jn 4:3 And EVERY SPIRIT THAT CONFESSETH NOT THAT JESUS CHRIST IS COME IN THE FLESH IS NOT OF GOD: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

2Jn 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, WHO CONFESS NOT THAT JESUS CHRIST IS COME IN THE FLESH. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

Though 2Jn 1:7 is not very specific, 1Jn 4:3 makes this specific and clear: every spirit that denies the fact that Jesus Christ who came in the flesh is from God is Antichrist.

Please ask yourself:

• Do not Catholics accept that Jesus Christ came from God?
• Do not Protestants believe that Jesus Christ came from God?
• Frankly, even Islam accepts that Jesus came from God, though they say he was just a prophet!
• In India, even Hindus accept that Jesus came from God!
• Do any of these groups fit the bill as Antichrist(s)?

A more explicit scripture:

1Jn 2:22 WHO IS A LIAR BUT HE THAT DENIETH THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST? HE IS ANTICHRIST, THAT DENIETH THE FATHER AND THE SON.

Can anyone show me a Christian group that denies the fact that Jesus is the Christ? Do Catholics deny it? Protestants? Mormons? Jehovah's Witnesses? A vast majority of Christians are unaware of the meaning of the words "Christ" and "Messiah", they presume that Jesus means Christ and vice versa. Whatever be Martin Luther's view, it is really inane to think that any Christian would deny that Jesus is the Christ!

How about denying the Father and the Son?

Can anyone show me a Christian group that denies the Father and the Son? Are there any group like that? Does believing Trinity mean denying the Father and the Son? Hardly, unless one is incensed against trinity believers.

There is only one group that existed in the first century, that denied/denies that Jesus is from God and denies the Father & the Son.

There is no prize for guessing! It is Jews and Jewish religion and none else fits the bill.

Am I being anti-Semitic?

If telling a hard truth makes me anti-Semitic, so be it. How many of you count Apostle Paul of being Anti-Semitic?

1Th 2:14 For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of THE JEWS:

1Th 2:15 WHO BOTH KILLED THE LORD JESUS, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and THEY PLEASE NOT GOD, AND ARE CONTRARY TO ALL MEN:

Can we read the same scripture with a slightly different emphasis?

1Th 2:15 WHO BOTH KILLED the Lord Jesus, and THEIR OWN PROPHETS, and have PERSECUTED US [Apostles & Saints]; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: (words enclosed in [] are added).

For me this verse is very, very close to this verse:

Rev 18:24 And IN HER WAS FOUND THE BLOOD OF PROPHETS, AND OF SAINTS [APOSTLES vs. 20], and of all that were slain upon the earth. (words enclosed in [] are added)

Frankly, I prefer to be termed as Anti-Semitic than to be identified with the killers of Jesus, Apostles, Prophets and Saints.

You may have a bad opinion about the American President or a leader of the nation from the Middle East, but that is not the criteria for deciding who is the Antichrist. Study the scriptures, keeping in mind the audience relevance!

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Will Hitler's spirit be saved? - LAMEST and DUMBEST question of LEGALISTS.

Legalist's question: Hi Tomsan, If you say all will be saved, will Hitler's spirit be saved? Will the spirit of the man who raped a 6 year old be saved?

These questions have been going around Christian circles for quite a long time.

Let me ask you, dear Legalist: According to your purely scriptural stance Hitler has to receive the same punishment as his 6 million victims because most of them were Jews who did not believe in Jesus. So, the man who got 6 million killed and those whom he killed are equally guilty in your understanding! Even by human standards such a justice system is defective.

Now let us come to the case of a Muslim man who raped a 6 year old Hindu girl. According to your standards, the Muslim rapist and his 6 year old Hindu victim should be burning in hell for not believing in Jesus. That is some fantastic justice system, isn't it?

Several times in the Bible it is said that God will listen to the groaning of the oppressed, hapless widows, fatherless and exiles. It is not stated that only if widows, orphans and exiles would be protected only if they call upon the name of Jehovah or Jesus. Can you tell me for certain that there were not even a single widow, orphan or exile among the 6 million victims of Hitler? Why did not God protect them?

Is it not told in the Bible that it is God that appoints Kings and Rulers? (Rom 13:1, Dan 2:21) Is it also not told that God knows the end from the beginning? (Isa 46:10) If these statements are true, then why did God put Hitler in the position of power where he could execute millions?

Friend, I do not claim that I have all the answers. You focus on a single man, say a Hitler or a rapist, I think of the millions of oppressed and victims and the justice to them.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal.

During the 5 minutes while Jesus was interacting with Nicodemus.

Friends,

I am sure you are familiar with the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus, recorded in the 3^rd chapter of John's gospel. There are some vital pronouncements in that conversation:

Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 

Joh 3:17  For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 

Joh 3:18  He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 

We cannot know the exact duration of this conversation. It takes me more than 3½ minutes to read John 3:1-21. Allowing the Son of God to think and respond to Nicodemus, let us assume that the conversation should have lasted for at least 5 minutes. (300 seconds)

While this conversation was happening:

• There were no telephones, radios, printing, internet or public transport. (So, no publishing, telecasting, broadcasting, webcasting, podcasting, YouTube...)
• Jesus' message hadn't crossed the borders of Israel.
• The world population should have been around 200 - 230 millions. 
• Though mortality rate should have been much higher than it is today (1.8 deaths per second), let us assume that it stood at 0.25 deaths per second.
• This means that during those 300 seconds, 75 people would have died.

So, even as Jesus was interacting with Nicodemus, 75 people died, without  believing in the Son of God - because they haven't got an opportunity to hear about Him. (Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.)

If God wanted the words uttered by Jesus to Nicodemus as the criteria for sealing the fate of these 75 people who died while those words were being uttered, why God did not give them a fair chance to hear those words?

Knowing that the words of Jesus did not cross the borders of Israel until some 3 years after His earthly ministry, 2.3 million people would have died without hearing about Jesus during those three 3 years.

If your soteriology insists that these people who were denied an opportunity to hear about Jesus are "already condemned" because they did not believe in the Son of God, it is just fine. What is not so commendable is your lack of discernment and common sense.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal