 |
I knew you would avoid the question. You can't answer it, can you? I didn't think so.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
That's the question at issue which Jl is unable to answer. I'm not surprised. To answer would require Jl's rethinking the Bible. He wouldn't be the first one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
What about the ones ye haven't gotten to yet? And the ones who lived and died before Jesus lived? What did ye do about those folks?Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
One of the great comic lines from Jl. When he says "steady and truthful", that means "consistently insulting" in Jl speak. Part of his habit of giving a different meaning to common words.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
He is getting a taste of his own medicine. Like all bullies, he doesn't like being on the receiving end.
Jl combines troll with stalker and, of course, denier of fact - his long-term character.
I just did. You must learn to tell the difference between a non-answer versus an answer you simply don't like.Quote:
I knew you would avoid the question. You can't answer it, can you? I didn't think so.
Quote:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/custom...quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Wondergirl https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/custom...post-right.png
What about all those billions who never heard about that sacrifice?
I would be content to at least start with the position of Aquinas. "Men are bound to that without which they cannot obtain salvation. Now it is manifest that no one can obtain salvation but through Christ; wherefore the Apostle says (Rom. 5:18): "As by the offense of one unto all men unto condemnation; so also by the justice of one, unto all men unto justification of life." But for this end is Baptism conferred on a man, that being regenerated thereby, he may be incorporated in Christ, by becoming His member: wherefore it is written (Gal. 3:27): "As many of you as have been baptized in Christ, have put on Christ." Consequently it is manifest that all are bound to be baptized: and that without Baptism there is no salvation for men."Quote:
That's the question at issue which Jl is unable to answer. I'm not surprised. To answer would require Jl's rethinking the Bible. He wouldn't be the first one.
Comic lines? When this is referred to as "dissing" and "bad-mouthing", and was done supposedly "behind (your) back", then how comical is that? "With Athos I am trying to learn to be steady, truthful, and as kind as the situation allows."Quote:
One of the great comic lines from Jl. When he says "steady and truthful", that means "consistently insulting" in Jl speak. Part of his habit of giving a different meaning to common words.
Think maybe you're a little overly sensitive?
wise words you should reflect on them
No, you didn't. not even close. Here's the question again:Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
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!
My Aquinas to your God who tortures his creation for all eternity.Quote:
I would be content to at least start with the position of Aquinas.
When he says "steady and truthful", that means "consistently insulting" in Jl speak. Part of his habit of giving a different meaning to common words.Quote:
With Athos I am trying to learn to be steady, truthful, and as kind as the situation allows.
No, but I do think you're stupid. ADS.Quote:
Think maybe you're a little overly sensitive?
And here's my answer again. "God’s love and goodness led Him to sacrifice His only Son so that people can avert judgment. Hard to imagine how you could find more goodness and love than that."
I'll stick with Jesus in Matthew 25 and the many other passages where he speaks of eternal judgment.
The only person being insulting here is you. I think I will not follow your example.Quote:
No, but I do think you're stupid. ADS.Quote:
When he says "steady and truthful", that means "consistently insulting" in Jl speak. Part of his habit of giving a different meaning to common words.
Uh Oh!!
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...is/ar-BB1ffd3RQuote:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/image/...AASUVORK5CYII=Hunter Biden admitted the laptop whose hard drive contents were obtained by the media in late 2020 “certainly ... could be” his after all,"
we are required to look after the living, Jesus said let the dead bury the dead, they are his concern not ours so stop being ridiculous as to the living all we can do is tell them the truth so no one said that this wasn't the responsibility of all, not jus oneQuote:
Originally Posted by Athos
Avoiding the question, I see. You're all the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
As to the living, do you seriously maintain everyone alive has known of Jesus and has decided not to believe in him? Thereby earning eternal punishment in hell?
What is wrong with you guys? Can you not understand the simplest of ideas?
That's not an answer - that's an evasion. A fact you know damn well, but cannot bring yourself to admit it.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Another evasion. You could not answer my post #277 citing Matthew 25 in this thread. It presents you with some home truths that make your position untenable.Quote:
I'll stick with Jesus in Matthew 25
You sound like a broken record - nothing new from you, just the same-old, same-old. #277 covers all your passages.Quote:
and the many other passages where he speaks of eternal judgment.
Another comedy! You are the one who began the whole insulting business. Now, getting burned on your own petard, you are whining about being on the receiving end. Poor baby - grow a pair!Quote:
The only person being insulting here is you. I think I will not follow your example.
You get the same answers because they are the correct answers. If Jesus is not good enough for you, then you'll just have to deal with Him about it.
Getting burned on my own petard??? Now I KNOW I won't follow your example.
You don't get burned on petards, you get hung and hoisted you have been
They are not remotely correct answers. They are EVASIONS! The truth is impossible for you to deal with.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
It's YOU the REAL Jesus is not good enough for. That's why you have him sending most of humanity to eternal torture. Think about that.Quote:
If Jesus is not good enough for you
Oh yeah, now THAT's some answer!! Anything to get out of answering, I see.Quote:
Then you'll just have to deal with Him about it.
I never offered you an example, did I? If you object to being burned on your own petard, then answer the question. But you won't, will you?Quote:
Getting burned on my own petard??? Now I KNOW I won't follow your example.
You promote a monstrous, murderous Jesus who doesn't exist and never existed because you worship a book instead of Jesus. Think about THAT - and the First Commandment while you're at it.
John 8:24. Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.”
Mt. 25"41 “Then He will also say to those on His left, ‘Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels;
Mt. 10:15 Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city.
Colossians 3:5,6. Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. 6 Because of these, the wrath of God is coming.
1 Thessalonians 1:10. “Jesus, who rescues us from the coming wrath.”
Matthew 3:12 His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
Matthew 5:22. “But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, 'Raca,' is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.”
Matthew 8:11,12. 11 I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. 12 But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Matthew 10:28. “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.”
Matthew 13:30. (This is the conclusion of the parable of the wheat and tares.) “Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.”
Matthew 13:49,50. “This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous 50 and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
Isaiah 45:21,22. Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the Lord? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. 22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.
At some point your feeble protests get buried under an avalanche of scriptural evidence. We have reached, and passed, that point, for there are many others that could be posted as well. So I can believe you, or I can believe the Bible.
I would encourage you to seriously consider this last verse. It answers your question about a God of love and goodness who is also, as Abraham called Him, the "judge of the whole earth".
John 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 life everlasting.
It is true that I worship and follow the Jesus of the Bible. It would seem that you are following a Jesus of your own invention. Wherever your ideas come from, it is not from the Bible. That explains why you don't use scripture in your arguments.
You mean the first commandment found in the same book that you just disparaged?Quote:
you worship a book instead of Jesus. Think about THAT - and the First Commandment while you're at it.
For all your scriptural "evidence", I refer you to my post #277. That post covers everything you may offer as "evidence". It is noteworthy that you continue to refuse (or are not capable of) answering that post. I wonder why?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
My question is COMPARING the God you claim is "all-loving" to the monstrous creation you have made of God who sends all those he doesn't like to an eternity of torture.Quote:
I would encourage you to seriously consider this last verse. It answers your question about a God of love and goodness
Not even close to the issue at hand - just more of your throwing out Bible verses that you think is an answer. You're been doing this for at least a year. When will you finally discuss the issue without your faulty reading of the Bible?Quote:
John 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 life everlasting.
No, what you are following is a bad understanding of Jesus that you have been handed since childhood. What you need to do is examine that belief - something you have never done.Quote:
It is true that I worship and follow the Jesus of the Bible.
My ideas about Jesus come from the Bible - where else could they come from? The invented Jesus is all yours - and others like you.Quote:
It would seem that you are following a Jesus of your own invention. Wherever your ideas come from, it is not from the Bible.
I have used the Bible in these discussions. It's just that I don't use an "avalanche" to swamp the discussion like you do. Do you really think Bible verses showing the unconditional love of Jesus are necessary to quote? I should think you would be aware of them by now.Quote:
That explains why you don't use scripture in your arguments.
A - Yes, that commandment. B - I never disparaged the book. I informed you of the proper ways to read the Bible, but you denied that and said the ONLY way is the LITERAL way. You are, in effect, disparaging the book yourself.Quote:
You mean the first commandment found in the same book that you just disparaged?
There are 2 of us in this discussion. One constantly refers to scripture while the other, as in your last rambling post, never does. Pretty much says it all. You don’t because you have no support there. So if you want to appeal to a particular passage as a foundation for your ideas (whatever they are), then I’ll be glad to respond. Your beliefs hold no interest without Bible support
@jlisenbe: it is clear that some people believe Gods Word has been corrupted.
Jesus spoke about hell more than anybody...be a feared.
@Athos
Better check yourself before you wreck yourself.
I really don't know what he believes. It's hard to figure out. But he is interesting to read, so I'll give him that.Quote:
@jlisenbe: it is clear that some people believe Gods Word has been corrupted.
Yes, it has been over the millennia -- there have been mistranslations and misinterpretations galore, many deliberate, some horrific, depending on the translators' and interpreters' motivations.Quote:
Originally Posted by waltero
List some specific examples. Say, five??? And bear in mind that we're not concerned about interpretations since that is all subjective at some level, but rather translation errors.Quote:
there have been mistranslations and misinterpretations galore, many deliberate, some horrific, depending on the translators' and interpreters' motivations.
There are five flawed translation techniques: etymology, internal structure, cognates, old mistranslations, and misunderstood metaphors. Examples as per your request:Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
1. Arsenokoitēs
2. Acts 12:4 (KJV) And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.
3. I John 5:7-8 The latter part of verse 7 and the first part of verse 8 did not exist until they were inserted into the Vulgate.
4. Revelation 1:11 does not appear in any of the ancient Greek texts.
5. The Red Sea.
We have Jesus/Bible.
What we have today is the written and living Word of God.
You are in Error if you think God has allowed the living Word to be corrupted.
Believing God would give his Son/Word and then throw a monkey wrench in the mix?
I thought God gave man free will! Of course, mankind can change and even corrupt when translating and reprinting God's Word -- and has, both accidentally AND deliberately. The original texts no longer exist, so then what?Quote:
Originally Posted by waltero
Then I guess you believe using your own understanding.
For me, I believe the Bible is God's Word. The same today as yesterday.
The living word given to us by God himself.
Nothing has been lost in translation.
God/Bible can not be corrupted.
God didn't just Drop the Bible in our laps and head out.
God with us = Bible
Any other understanding would just create confusion.
Believing God isn't able to preserve his Word.
Apparently, you haven't done any serious Bible study or compared the many versions. Yes, the Bible itself is God's Word, but we have only translations now, not the original manuscripts.Quote:
Originally Posted by waltero
We have the Bible translation in the life of Jesus.
Consider the translations better than the original? The word of God none the less.
Trust in God.
I trust God has provided his word.
The translations have been corrupted here and there. Misunderstandings have resulted. Which translation do you use?Quote:
Originally Posted by waltero
No one has seen the originals for millennia.Quote:
Consider the translations better than the original?the word of God none the less.
Trust in God.
No evidence whatsoever that the word is not translated properly to "homosexual". Your desire for it to be so does not count.Quote:
1. Arsenokoitēs
The other four examples have no real significance and do not affect any major doctrine of scripture. In no way do they fit your description of, "mistranslations and misinterpretations galore, many deliberate, some horrific, depending on the translators' and interpreters' motivations." Perhaps your comment was more directed at "misinterpretations"?Quote:
2. Acts 12:4 (KJV) And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.
3. I John 5:7-8 The latter part of verse 7 and the first part of verse 8 did not exist until they were inserted into the Vulgate.
4. Revelation 1:11 does not appear in any of the ancient Greek texts.
5. The Red Sea.
Your example #3 is far from certain.
Your example #4 is a moot point. It pertains, as you should know, to only the first words of the verse, and not to the entire verse. It is translated correctly in practically all modern translations. You should also know that, "It should be noted that the phrases "Alpha and Omega," "the first and the last," and/or "the beginning and the end" are found in the original texts of Rev. 1:8, 1:17, 2:8, 21:6, and 22:13."
Which is true for ALL ancient works. The textual evidence for the correct transmission is the NT is better than for any other work of antiquity.Quote:
No one has seen the originals for millennia.
It was not translated as "homosexual" until 1946 in the RSV. Paul had coined the term and was referring to men who molest young boys, i.e., child molesters, pedophiles.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
A perfect example of your idolization of a book. Try to understand what you read.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
It's simple to figure out. Here it is - I do NOT believe Jesus sends millions of humanity to hell for eternal punishment. Now THAT wasn't hard to figure out, was it?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Nice try but it won't work. Practically all modern translations render the word as "homosexual" or some synonym of the word as do all modern concordances and all major Greek lexicons. And prior to 1946, the word was rendered "abusers of themselves with mankind", which hardly gives you any help. So to say that your position is a minority one would be a dramatic understatement of your situation.Quote:
It was not translated as "homosexual" until 1946 in the RSV. Paul had coined the term and was referring to men who molest young boys, i.e., child molesters, pedophiles.
You must be a lot older than I thought to be able to state what Paul was referring to by the use of the word. Did he tell you that?
"That word is an unusual word. It’s a new word; we don’t know of any other instances of the word until Paul coins the word in 1 Corinthians 6 and 1 Timothy 1. It’s a compound word: “arsen” means man and “koite” or “koitas” or “koitai”—depending on a verb or a noun—means bed. It’s men who bed with other men.
It’s quite clear that Paul has coined this word from Leviticus 18 and 20. Even if you don’t know any Greek, you could find online or pull up the Greek transliteration of these two verses. Look at the Septuagint, which is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, and then just look at the Greek for the necessary passage in Leviticus 18 and Leviticus 20 and you'll see there (and in fact the words are right next to each other in Leviticus 20) this word for man (“arsen”) and the word for bed (“koitai” or “koite”).
Paul is quite deliberately pulling from the Torah to make this new word. So he has in his mind all that was written in the Old Testament. And that’s part of the reason why we can’t just say, “Well Leviticus has a lot of strange things and so we shouldn’t pay attention to Leviticus.” Because Paul is explicitly drawing this teaching into the New Testament to coin this word which, given the context in Leviticus and how it’s used elsewhere after the New Testament, means men having sex with other men. And there is no real other interpretation that makes the best sense of the evidence both in the early Christian literature and especially in the Old Testament."
https://www.crossway.org/articles/wh...nokoitai-mean/
I find the word arsen interesting in this context as arse today refers to the posterior, that which the homosexual seeks
And the pedophile....Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
So straight people who engage in anal sex are what exactly?
QUOTE] - I do NOT believe Jesus sends millions of humanity to hell for eternal punishment[/QUOTE]
So you understand there is a place called Hell?
Why would an all loving God allow somebody to suffer for one day (eternity is irrelevant)?
Should a Christian understand that God would allow his word (the word that we put our faith in) to be corrupted and looked on with doubt?
Is one denomination more Christian than another? Is one Bible interpolation more God than another?
I know! I was thinking about that very thing!Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
So you understand there is a place called Hell?Quote:
Originally Posted by waltero
Why would an all loving God allow somebody to suffer for one day (eternity is irrelevant)?
Should a Christian understand that God would allow his word (the word that we put our faith in) to be corrupted and looked on with doubt?
Is one denomination more Christian than another? Is one Bible interpolation more God than another?
These are eternal questions, usually posed by those who don't believe and therefore face damnation
deviant and equally condemnedQuote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
I think the Creator has a sense of humor watching humans figure it out.
It's not the manner in which two people have sex that counts. It's the gender of the two people that counts, and then whether or not they are married. All pretty clear for those who take the time to read.
At any rate, this statement (there have been mistranslations and misinterpretations galore, many deliberate, some horrific, depending on the translators' and interpreters' motivations.) has fallen by the wayside as well it should have. There are no "horrific" mistranslations.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:54 PM. |