why would you want that, do you really want insight into how he thinksQuote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
|
why would you want that, do you really want insight into how he thinksQuote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
And you don't know how faith does not earn??? Really???Quote:
I went to a Bible college for FOUR years.
We are talking about both and how God loves everyone but does not save everyone.Quote:
We're not talking about salvation. We're talking about God's unconditional love for us.
I'm getting a sense of that. We started with peanut butter crackers and are moving along the snack table toward the braunschweiger dip.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
That's not very loving.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
free will
God gave us that. And He's going to send people to hell for using it?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Read your Bible and find out.
So you have no answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
You first need to find out why faith does not earn. Don’t get ahead of yourself. Romans 1-4.
Incredible how Jl changes the topic and goes off on a wild goose chase into the weeds of the Bible where nothing will ever be agreed to in the mind of Jl unless it conforms to his belief. A dead giveaway is his refusal to answer anything in his own words.
His deflection away from the main issue has now gone on for hours. He cannot or will not answer the question in his own words. Love and/or unconditional love has been his deflection du jour.
Here's the question at issue (for the 4th or 5th time!).
Which one is true - Matthew's passage or God's love? Both can't be true. Would an unconditionally loving God cast his creatures into his personal torture chamber for all eternity simply because they never heard of or believed in Jesus? Of course not!
To help Jl in his inability to answer this simple question, and to eliminate his ability to deflect, I will allow the "unconditionally loving" phrase to be omitted. It is not needed and its omission does not change the question one iota.
I'm sure Jl will come up with something else to evade answering.
Here’s the answer for the tenth time. Your question is based upon your foolish misunderstanding of God’s unconditional love. Fix that and you will see for yourself how silly it is. Your lack of knowledge has betrayed you.
LOL. It's getting too easy to predict what Jl will say. I guess he missed the part about dropping unconditional love since he's still harping on that - "...foolish misunderstanding of God's love". That's his "answer". Funny kind of answer that doesn't address the question.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Jl, are you aware that this is a public forum, and you are being observed? Aren't you at least a little ashamed with your constant evasions?
Athos no Trumpster is ashamed of evasion
You’re done Athos. Your question is answered and your lack of knowledge is in the public domain. Too bad for you. You could not even begin to defend your vague, undefined, foggy position. Better luck next time.
Getting a bit steamed, eh, Jl? Your slobber is showing, and it ain't pretty.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Here's the question in case you missed it.
Which one is true - Matthew's passage or God's love? Both can't be true. Would an (unconditionally loving) God cast his creatures into his personal torture chamber for all eternity simply because they never heard of or believed in Jesus? Of course not!
To make it easy for you, I put in parens the offending phrase. Now, instead of casting insults, how about answering?
Here’s the answer for the tenth, or rather eleventh, time. Your question is based upon your foolish misunderstanding of God’s unconditional love. Fix that and you will see for yourself how silly it is. Your lack of knowledge has betrayed you. Your understanding is so bad that you can't even define your own conditions. It's laughable except that it's so pathetic.
You already said that in the previous post. Repeating yourself is proof positive you have nothing to offer but hackneyed insults that convince nobody. Repeating a non-answer is worse. But you just keep rolling along in your frustrated nastiness.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Repetition is a wonderful tool for teaching. Just consider this to be the twelfth posting of my answer. You'll catch on sooner or later. I guess better late than never.
I would ask you to repeat your answer, but you haven’t given one. Here is the question again in very simple terms. What do you consider unconditional love to be? Wonder girl jumped right in. Why not you? And if you would, you would likely see the fatal flaw in your question that's giving you so much trouble.
Gosh. For someone who claimed to have me on his ignore list, you sure do follow right along with my posts.
We know God's love is unconditional. Let's pare that down to "God's love".Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I used that term because it was part of his question.
I do agree with your point.
I'll leave you with this. How do you believe God's love factored into this event in the history of Israel found in 2 Kings 21?
Quote:
“Because Manasseh king of Judah has done these abominations (he has acted more wickedly than all the Amorites who were before him, and has also made Judah sin with his idols), 12 therefore thus says the Lord God of Israel: ‘Behold, I am bringing such calamity upon Jerusalem and Judah, that whoever hears of it, both his ears will tingle. 13 And I will stretch over Jerusalem the measuring line of Samaria and the plummet of the house of Ahab; I will wipe Jerusalem as one wipes a dish, wiping it and turning it upside down. 14 So I will forsake the remnant of My inheritance and deliver them into the hand of their enemies; and they shall become victims of plunder to all their enemies, 15 because they have done evil in My sight, and have provoked Me to anger since the day their fathers came out of Egypt, even to this day.’
You guys are off the rails.
let your hope rest in the LOVE that IS God, embody that LOVE so that we might become whole
we are god's glory, god's glory is returning back to himself.
Nope, this is the twelfth posting of your NON-answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
You're deflecting again, Jl.Quote:
I would ask you to repeat your answer, but you haven’t given one.
Thanks for imitating me - it's very flattering.Quote:
Here is the question again in very simple terms.
Why do you ask? Doncha love answering a question with a question?Quote:
What do you consider unconditional love to be?
She gave a great description. I was impressed.Quote:
Wonder girl jumped right in.
Why me? It has nothing to do with my question. You're deflecting again.Quote:
Why not you?
As I stated more than once, I choose to engage whenever I want. Your lack of comprehension re this may explain a lot about you. That might be the key to your evasions.Quote:
Gosh. For someone who claimed to have me on his ignore list, you sure do follow right along with my posts.
Here's a question right out of your deflection school. Do you think God/Jesus ENJOYS the millions being tortured in hell? Does he make time out of his busy day to look in at the suffering? Which do you think he most freaks on - little kids or old people? Please provide Bible support for your reply.
Heaven and Hell are simply the complete opposites of one another. As Heaven (as in God) is the Source of life, then Hell is the consumer of life.
Heaven gives, Hell takes…
Jesus described Hell like this dump in which there was fire that was always burning, because it was constantly being heaped up with trash. So what does a fire do? It consumes everything… That's what Hell is- a place that consumes everything, even your soul. It is a place that does not have the ability to produce, so in order for it to exist it has to consume.
People mostly think of Hell as eternal torture, and in a way it is, but way worse than you think. Yes, eternal torture is bad, but becoming non-existent is worse. We may not think much of it now because we don't have full awareness of our state of existence, but to lose your soul or existence is most horrible, especially when you are acutely aware of it- as in being present as it is happening and not being able to do anything about it
This has become unproductive. I've answered very satisfactorily. You have chosen not to. Should you change your mind, then perhaps we can continue. Until then, I will continue to believe the Bible rather than you, and will continue to pray that you will see the truth at some point.
Walter, I'll give you the same challenge that Athos could not accept. Where does the Bible support your ideas about hell?
Hell, Hell is for Children!
We Don't have to believe in Hell to be saved.
Believe, Don't believe. I see no reason for those who don't believe in a Hell, to fight against it's existence?
And in all reality It will be wiped away and will be remembered no more.
The same with speaking in tongues, Faith healers etc. It is a reality for some. Why fight against it if it brings those closer to God?
Why Lambast other believers/Churches?
let your hope rest in the LOVE that IS God, embody that LOVE so that we might become whole
we are god's glory, god's glory is returning back to himself.
Why bring up something you have no faith forQuote:
Originally Posted by waltero
Another challenge bites the dust.Quote:
Walter...Where does the Bible support your ideas about hell?
Only because you continue to refuse to answer the question.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Not even close. Here's the question for you -Quote:
I've answered very satisfactorily.
Which one is true - Matthew's passage or God's love? Both can't be true. Would an (unconditionally loving) God cast his creatures into his personal torture chamber for all eternity simply because they never heard of or believed in Jesus? Of course not!
Here's your answer -
Here’s the answer for the tenth time. Your question is based upon your foolish misunderstanding of God’s unconditional love. Fix that and you will see for yourself how silly it is. Your lack of knowledge has betrayed you.
Some answer, huh Folks? Especially after I fixed it by putting "unconditional love" in parens. Doesn't look silly to me.
Do you pray for the folks in hell suffering through no fault of their own?Quote:
I will continue to pray that you will see the truth
Luke 19:40 "I tell you," He replied, "that if *they* became silent, the very stones would cry out."Quote:
Did you ever consider that the Bible has so many strange verses, that it can't possibly be literally true?
One reason we should take the Bible literally is because the Lord Jesus Christ took it literally. Whenever the Lord Jesus quoted from the Old Testament, it was always clear that He believed in its literal interpretation. As an example, when Jesus was tempted by Satan in Luke 4, He answered by quoting the Old Testament.
The Bible says “The wages of sin is death,” and ours is the cup of God’s wrath. We merit eternal separation from God. The cup of God’s just wrath against sin is both physical and spiritual death. It is eternal death, eternal separation from the blessing of God’s presence.Quote:
It's ridiculous that God should send the majority of humanity to his own private torture chamber for eternity.
There is a wonderful statement in Isaiah 51:22. Mark this verse, and memorize it, because if you are a child of God, this is your inheritance. “This is what the Sovereign Lord says, your God who defends his people: ‘See, I have taken out of your hand the cup that made you stagger; from that cup, the goblet of my wrath, you will never drink again.'”
What a wonderful, glorious exchange! All our sins are taken, our guilt is removed, our hell is taken, and all the wrath due us was endured by him. Based on the work of the suffering servant in Isaiah 53, God states, “from that cup, the goblet of my wrath, you will never drink again.”
The Bible emphasizes
that we are called to a relationship with God by God’s love for us.
The death of Jesus on the cross shows God’s incredible and almost "impossible
to understand" love for us.
We do not have the same scriptures Jesus had. The ones we have have been translated many times from ancient languages and unconsciously and even deliberately changed. Words have been changed because of personal, ecclesiastical, and cultural demands and preferences and even errors, plus because of incorrect language understandings.Quote:
Originally Posted by waltero
You keep saying that, and yet you have no evidence it is true, and you have no significant examples. I mean, "Red Sea, Reed Sea". Really?Quote:
We do not have the same scriptures Jesus had. The ones we have have been translated many times from ancient languages and unconsciously and even deliberately changed. Words have been changed because of personal, ecclesiastical, and cultural demands and preferences and even errors, plus because of incorrect language understandings.
Walter's statement is a good one.
So God calls us and if we say, "Thanks, but not now," God dumps us and eventually sends us to a fiery hell?Quote:
Originally Posted by waltero
One example --Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
In the original Hebrew, Joseph’s famous coat is said to be “ketonet passim.” “Passim” can be used to mean “colorful” but the phase is also used to describe a long garment that came down to a person’s hands and feet. Such garments were made of fine wool or silk and normally worn by royalty. Most importantly, this was not a garment that could be worn while working. As such, by giving Joseph such a garment, Jacob essentially declared that Joseph was too good to work in the fields. Joseph’s brothers took issue not with some colorful cloth, though dyed fabric would be very expensive and valuable, but with the clear declaration that he was of such a high station that he no longer had to join them in the fields.
From https://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/chr...0;kill.”
You see such things are a debate about nothing, since it was Joseph's attitude that was the problem not his clothing
How about this one --Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
The sixth commandment is written in Hebrew as “lo tirtsah.” The verb “ratash” does not mean “kill.” It means “murder.” There is a world of difference between forbidding any sort of killing and outlawing murder.
Had this verse been meant to refer to any sort of killing, the word “harag” would likely have been used. Between the choice of word and the repeated discussions in the Bible of capital punishment, war and manslaughter, proscribing any sort of killing would make no sense. It would also be a death wish in the ancient world when survival often relied on very literally living out the proverb “if someone comes to kill you, rise early and kill him first.”
Excellent examples.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
The Bible has been translated into almost 700 languages, 3000+ if counting partial translations.
The number of versions in English alone is in the hundreds beginning in the 7th century. Are we to believe we have the precise Bible as it was first written down? Like any book or series of books it has been subject to the biases and the culture and speech patterns of the era in which it was translated.
The basic message hasn't changed, but many of the details have, influenced by the agenda of the existing "authorities" of the day.
Joseph's coat? Really? You think that's a real problem? And the sixth commandment is generally translated as "murder" in nearly every modern translation including the New King James Version.
But even those two examples amount to mistranslations. You still have offered nothing to demonstrate that, "We do not have the same scriptures Jesus had." Do you have evidence at all to support that?
WG, if you have no evidence to support that statement, then perhaps you should ask yourself why you made it.
That's well said, Walter. It's why the love of God is the answer to, and not a contradiction of, the justice of God for all who accept it.Quote:
The Bible emphasizes
that we are called to a relationship with God by God’s love for us.
The death of Jesus on the cross shows God’s incredible and almost "impossible
to understand" love for us.
Just about everybody learned it as Thou shalt not kill - not "murder". Either way, it's ironic that the guy who commanded that is the biggest mass murderer in human history.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Even if everything you say is true and significant (it's not), it still does not provide support for WG's statement that Jesus was reading a different OT than we have.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:44 AM. |