# I couldn't help it



## ambush80

This was just too funny not to share.


----------



## WaltL1

ambush80 said:


> This was just too funny not to share.


I think this might be playing in the background -


----------



## ambush80

WaltL1 said:


> I think this might be playing in the background -



What a dingy....

The wake of a Disney cruise ship would turn that thing upside down.

I probably saw that episode.


----------



## drippin' rock

ambush80 said:


> This was just too funny not to share.



This sums up the whole mess, doesn't it.


----------



## welderguy

The reason you find it funny is because it's man's twisted up , untrue interpretation of the Bible.
If that was actually how it is, I would be crying instead.


----------



## ambush80

welderguy said:


> The reason you find it funny is because it's man's twisted up , untrue interpretation of the Bible.
> If that was actually how it is, I would be crying instead.



The things you say are funny.


----------



## welderguy

ambush80 said:


> The things you say are funny.



There is truth in that statement.


----------



## ambush80

welderguy said:


> There is truth in that statement.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> The reason you find it funny is because it's man's twisted up , untrue interpretation of the Bible.
> If that was actually how it is, I would be crying instead.


Come on Welder lets be honest here.
The Bible/Christianity is at its foundation a reward/punishment system.
There are positives (rewards) for "letting him in" and negatives (punishments) for "keeping the door shut".
It has nothing to do with whether you believe it or not, the story is what it is.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> Come on Welder lets be honest here.
> The Bible/Christianity is at its foundation a reward/punishment system.
> There are positives (rewards) for "letting him in" and negatives (punishments) for "keeping the door shut".
> It has nothing to do with whether you believe it or not, the story is what it is.



You have it totally backwards. Jesus is the door of the sheep(John 10). He's the One that opens and shuts it only for His chosen sheep. No goats allowed.

(if you are referencing Revelation 3, this is spoken to sheep that are already in the fold.)


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> You have it totally backwards. Jesus is the door of the sheep(John 10). He's the One that opens and shuts it only for His chosen sheep. No goats allowed.
> 
> (if you are referencing Revelation 3, this is spoken to sheep that are already in the fold.)


I wasn't referencing Rev 3 or John 10.
I was referencing this fact -


> The Bible/Christianity is at its foundation a reward/punishment system.
> There are positives (rewards) for "letting him in" and negatives (punishments) for "keeping the door shut".


No sheep, no goats, no verses, no belief or disbelief are involved.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> I wasn't referencing Rev 3 or John 10.
> I was referencing this fact -
> 
> No sheep, no goats, no verses, no belief or disbelief are involved.



Ooooooooh. The bible, but no verses. There's a concept.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> Ooooooooh. The bible, but no verses. There's a concept.


Your overwhelming desire to defend what you perceive to be an "attack on Jesus" is causing you to argue the unarguable.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> Your overwhelming desire to defend what you perceive to be an "attack on Jesus" is causing you to argue the unarguable.



It's not so much that I perceive it as an attack on Jesus as rather a gross misrepresentation of His relationship toward His people. I believe this is quite arguable.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> It's not so much that I perceive it as an attack on Jesus as rather a gross misrepresentation of His relationship toward His people. I believe this is quite arguable.


Of course you do.
Start by proving this wrong - 


> The Bible/Christianity is at its foundation a reward/punishment system.


We'll go from there.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> Of course you do.
> Start by proving this wrong -
> 
> We'll go from there.



First of all, I believe the foundation of the bible/Christianity to be Christ,and more specifically, His salvation by grace. This theme is interwoven throughout the entirety of scripture. And because grace is not based on our actions or merit,consequently reward/punishment is rendered irrelevant to the work of grace.


----------



## Artfuldodger

WaltL1 said:


> Of course you do.
> Start by proving this wrong -
> 
> We'll go from there.



You are arguing with the wrong believer. In Welder's believed version, the rewards/punishment system is out the door. 
Even so most or some free will believers don't see it that way as well. It's more of a 100% grace from God plan that doesn't require works for rewards or punishment.

Now the Old School systems such as Catholic and some Protestant denominations are still under the rewards/punishment system. Many do believe that salvation is based on works and that believers receive rewards or punishment based on their actions.

The argument to arouse Welderguy should be the answer asked by the OP which has nothing to do with a rewards/punishment type of system.

The OP presented a scenario in which God created a system that required salvation from a punishment that he created. In other words God created eternal death, the sin that sends one there, and a way out of that eternal death. 
Now in Welder's belief system, only God who created the scenario, can offer the grace to escape eternal death. His plan, his salvation. It does get a bit confusing but if God created the scenario, it would stand to reason he would get to choose who gets to benefit from it. So under his plan in no way does it have anything to do with rewards and punishment as to who receives salvation. Even if it is somewhat based on rewards and/or punishment, the salvation from the punishment isn't. God created the system but not everyone gets to benefit. Again, his plan of doom, his salvation from doom.

Perhaps a free will believer will stumble upon this thread and try to defend the OP. I'm going to have to side with Welder on this one.

In doing so I would agree with the OP. God created a plan in which man would fail and he would send the salvation but only to some and not everyone. God created a system in which man would be punished for the ideals he deem the punishment warranted. The million dollar question would be, why didn't he offer a way out for the whole crowd? Also, why didn't he offer a way for the whole crowd to hear about his offer? 

As a man, I would think that if God made this plan, he would offer the whole crowd a way out or to at least hear the story of the way out. But then again, I'm merely a man using man's logic. Based on what I have been revealed by scripture, it's up to God to reveal to the individuals as to whom he wants to save. To save from the punishment he created.
Which I think is good because God can reach way more folk than man can. Enlightened with knowledge, man just recently reached the far reaches of the earth. God could have reached them before man even had ships. His Ark is greater than all of our ships!


----------



## drippin' rock

welderguy said:


> First of all, I believe the foundation of the bible/Christianity to be Christ,and more specifically, His salvation by grace. This theme is interwoven throughout the entirety of scripture. And because grace is not based on our actions or merit,consequently reward/punishment is rendered irrelevant to the work of grace.



If I don't believe, and I don't let Jesus into my heart, what happens to me?


----------



## welderguy

drippin' rock said:


> If I don't believe, and I don't let Jesus into my heart, what happens to me?



If you never believe, then it is evidence that God didn't change your heart so that you could believe.


Philippians 1:29
29 For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;


----------



## Artfuldodger

drippin' rock said:


> If I don't believe, and I don't let Jesus into my heart, what happens to me?



I believe you will die when you die if not given the gift of everlasting life. Death will be your punishment. If you want to view it as  punishment. Maybe since you may not have a choice, punishment is the wrong word to use. Perhaps use God's original plan for you.

It could be that the eternal life plan is part of your original destiny and it hasn't been revealed to you yet. 

Would you consider eternal death a punishment? Would you consider eternal life a reward?
I've often wondered how many folks over the age of 95 are tired of living.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> First of all, I believe the foundation of the bible/Christianity to be Christ,and more specifically, His salvation by grace. This theme is interwoven throughout the entirety of scripture. And because grace is not based on our actions or merit,consequently reward/punishment is rendered irrelevant to the work of grace.


You are supposed to be proving this wrong -


> The Bible/Christianity is at its foundation a reward/punishment system.


Not telling us what you believe.


----------



## WaltL1

Artfuldodger said:


> You are arguing with the wrong believer. In Welder's believed version, the rewards/punishment system is out the door.
> Even so most or some free will believers don't see it that way as well. It's more of a 100% grace from God plan that doesn't require works for rewards or punishment.
> 
> Now the Old School systems such as Catholic and some Protestant denominations are still under the rewards/punishment system. Many do believe that salvation is based on works and that believers receive rewards or punishment based on their actions.
> 
> The argument to arouse Welderguy should be the answer asked by the OP which has nothing to do with a rewards/punishment type of system.
> 
> The OP presented a scenario in which God created a system that required salvation from a punishment that he created. In other words God created eternal death, the sin that sends one there, and a way out of that eternal death.
> Now in Welder's belief system, only God who created the scenario, can offer the grace to escape eternal death. His plan, his salvation. It does get a bit confusing but if God created the scenario, it would stand to reason he would get to choose who gets to benefit from it. So under his plan in no way does it have anything to do with rewards and punishment as to who receives salvation. Even if it is somewhat based on rewards and/or punishment, the salvation from the punishment isn't. God created the system but not everyone gets to benefit. Again, his plan of doom, his salvation from doom.
> 
> Perhaps a free will believer will stumble upon this thread and try to defend the OP. I'm going to have to side with Welder on this one.
> 
> In doing so I would agree with the OP. God created a plan in which man would fail and he would send the salvation but only to some and not everyone. God created a system in which man would be punished for the ideals he deem the punishment warranted. The million dollar question would be, why didn't he offer a way out for the whole crowd? Also, why didn't he offer a way for the whole crowd to hear about his offer?
> 
> As a man, I would think that if God made this plan, he would offer the whole crowd a way out or to at least hear the story of the way out. But then again, I'm merely a man using man's logic. Based on what I have been revealed by scripture, it's up to God to reveal to the individuals as to whom he wants to save. To save from the punishment he created.
> Which I think is good because God can reach way more folk than man can. Enlightened with knowledge, man just recently reached the far reaches of the earth. God could have reached them before man even had ships. His Ark is greater than all of our ships!


Yes I am aware of Welder's belief system.
Only a tiny fraction of Christianity believes the same. Its not what is taught in mainstream Christianity.
When your "proof" starts out with "I believe" you arent offering proof, you are just offering another unproven opinion.
You can complicate it as much as you want.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> Yes I am aware of Welder's belief system.
> Only a tiny fraction of Christianity believes the same. Its not what is taught in mainstream Christianity.
> When your "proof" starts out with "I believe" you arent offering proof, you are just offering another unproven opinion.
> You can complicate it as much as you want.



In essence, what you are saying to me is "tell me what the bible says about itself....oh but, by the way, forget all those pesky verses,...and also leave off any beliefs you may have about its meaning because belief is so irrelevant."

This conversation was doomed from the beginning. You have your fingers in your ears.


----------



## NCHillbilly

welderguy said:


> First of all, I believe the foundation of the bible/Christianity to be Christ,and more specifically, His salvation by grace. This theme is interwoven throughout the entirety of scripture. And because grace is not based on our actions or merit,consequently reward/punishment is rendered irrelevant to the work of grace.



According to the Bible, the default switch for humans is set to "burn in horrible everlasting torment" unless you seek out and accept Jesus. Pretty much exactly what that picture says. I am condemned to everlasting torment because some woman a few thousand years ago had a conversation with a talking snake.  True grace would not make "burn in he11" the default setting. It's pretty twisted and unfair if you ask me.


----------



## welderguy

NCHillbilly said:


> According to the Bible, the default switch for humans is set to "burn in horrible everlasting torment" unless you seek out and accept Jesus. Pretty much exactly what that picture says. I am condemned to everlasting torment because some woman a few thousand years ago had a conversation with a talking snake.  True grace would not make "burn in he11" the default setting. It's pretty twisted and unfair if you ask me.



No sir. "burning in he11" is not the default setting. That's where the man-based religion has twisted it into what you see in the picture.
See, what they like to ignore is the fact that God chose a people for His own glory and pleasure BEFORE He ever created a thing. He predestined them to eventually live with Him forever. No matter what man did to seemingly mess that up, He already purposed it. 
Man-based religion likes to think he is in charge of his eternal destiny. That he can choose to accept or not accept.That is a farce.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> In essence, what you are saying to me is "tell me what the bible says about itself....oh but, by the way, forget all those pesky verses,...and also leave off any beliefs you may have about its meaning because belief is so irrelevant."
> 
> This conversation was doomed from the beginning. You have your fingers in your ears.


No.
For about the 3rd time now I will direct you back. -
Prove this wrong -


> The Bible/Christianity is at its foundation a reward/punishment system.


You are trying to prove it wrong by giving your interpretation of scripture.
To top off it, you've already said this -


> it's man's twisted up , untrue interpretation of the Bible.


Obviously you feel man's interpretations of scripture can't be trusted.
And I agree.
Soo prove it wrong.


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> Man-based religion likes to think he is in charge of his eternal destiny. That he can choose to accept or not accept.That is a farce.



a/k/a "historic Christianity"


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> No.
> For about the 3rd time now I will direct you back. -
> Prove this wrong -
> 
> You are trying to prove it wrong by giving your interpretation of scripture.
> To top off it, you've already said this -
> 
> Obviously you feel man's interpretations of scripture can't be trusted.
> And I agree.
> Soo prove it wrong.



You are right. I'm using scripture for my proof because I believe wholeheartedly that it is truth. Believers argue on differences of interpretation but they agree that the Bible is truth. 
The disconnect comes when one such as you says the Bible is not truth. That's the dead end road.
I can give you verse after verse "proving" what I believe, but at the end of the day you will just say "the Bible is not truth".

Let's do an experiment.
I make the declaration that you cannot believe Jesus is the Son of God without Him causing you to. Man-based religion says you can.
Ok, prove me wrong. Let's see if you can.(this will take perfect honesty BTW).


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> You are right. I'm using scripture for my proof because I believe wholeheartedly that it is truth. Believers argue on differences of interpretation but they agree that the Bible is truth.
> The disconnect comes when one such as you says the Bible is not truth. That's the dead end road.
> I can give you verse after verse "proving" what I believe, but at the end of the day you will just say "the Bible is not truth".
> 
> Let's do an experiment.
> I make the declaration that you cannot believe Jesus is the Son of God without Him causing you to. Man-based religion says you can.
> Ok, prove me wrong. Let's see if you can.(this will take perfect honesty BTW).


It is up to the person making the claim to be able to back it up.
The burden of proof is on you.

Why it comes across as so phony is because nobody can actually back up what they constantly claim as truth.

Why doesn't it bother you that your god exists between the pages of a book and nowhere else?


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> It is up to the person making the claim to be able to back it up.
> The burden of proof is on you.
> 
> Why it comes across as so phony is because nobody can actually back up what they constantly claim as truth.
> 
> Why doesn't it bother you that your god exists between the pages of a book and nowhere else?



Hey bullet.
Would you like to join in the experiment?


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Hey bullet.
> Would you like to join in the experiment?



It is NOT an experiment. It is an effort in futility. It is no different than inserting any fictional character or real person and making an outlandish and unprovable claim on their behalf.

I make the claim that I am the Son of God and you do not believe me unless I want you to.
Man based religion (ill start one if that is necessary for your ruse) says you can.

Prove me wrong.

It is not the details welder it is the premise. When the most important part of your experiment relies on someone being the son of god and you absolutely cannot provide evidence of that, the rest is a game of pretend also.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> It is NOT an experiment. It is an effort in futility. It is no different than inserting any fictional character or real person and making an outlandish and unprovable claim on their behalf.
> 
> I make the claim that I am the Son of God and you do not believe me unless I want you to.
> Man based religion (ill start one if that is necessary for your ruse) says you can.
> 
> Prove me wrong.
> 
> It is not the details welder it is the premise. When the most important part of your experiment relies on someone being the son of god and you absolutely cannot provide evidence of that, the rest is a game of pretend also.



So basically, by saying all this you are confirming that you not only do not believe, but cannot believe Jesus is the Son of God?

You are participating, whether you want to or not my friend.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> So basically, by saying all this you are confirming that you not only do not believe, but cannot believe Jesus is the Son of God?
> 
> You are participating, whether you want to or not my friend.


You just cannot comprehend the error in your line of thinking and when pointed out to you all you do is ignore it and continue on.

But luckily since your are are a willing participant,  you are participating in my experiment also.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> You just cannot comprehend the error in your line of thinking and when pointed out to you all you do is ignore it and continue on.
> 
> But luckily since your are are a willing participant,  you are participating in my experiment also.



Ok. I will participate in your experiment. 
You say that you are the son of God. And the reason I don't believe you is because you are not letting me believe it. 
Now, since you have this power, and for the sake of our search for truth and proof, use this power to cause me to believe that you are the son of God. And I will honestly tell you if it worked.

Ok, go ahead. I'm ready.


----------



## ambush80

welderguy said:


> Ok. I will participate in your experiment.
> You say that you are the son of God. And the reason I don't believe you is because you are not letting me believe it.
> Now, since you have this power, and for the sake of our search for truth and proof, use this power to cause me to believe that you are the son of God. And I will honestly tell you if it worked.
> 
> Ok, go ahead. I'm ready.



You're not one of the chosen ones.  See how that works?

By the way, Bullet has been asking for the same thing from your God for as long as I've been on GON.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Ok. I will participate in your experiment.
> You say that you are the son of God. And the reason I don't believe you is because you are not letting me believe it.
> Now, since you have this power, and for the sake of our search for truth and proof, use this power to cause me to believe that you are the son of God. And I will honestly tell you if it worked.
> 
> Ok, go ahead. I'm ready.


I am not a parlor trick. You are believing exactly as I have planned for you to believe. You are not capable of understanding my reasons but it was me that caused you to not only think of your first experiment but to abandon it and enter my experiment. I have manipulated you to do this as a sign that I am all powerful and IF I wanted you to believe in me that you would,  but that I have also given you free will to doubt me.
You now have evidence that I am fully capable of getting you to do as I please, when I please and more importantly IF I please.
Check the bible. It foretells of these things.


----------



## Israel

Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.


----------



## bullethead

Welder,  unlike the false god you worship, you witnessed me write my own words. You witnessed my power to reach into your heart and guide you to participate. This didnt happen and  40 years later someone wrote it down and now you read about 1900 years after that.
Think about how gracious I am to include you and have you not only witness this but participate.


----------



## bullethead

Israel said:


> Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.



Unfortunately you need a permit to solicit and nobody is buying what you are selling.


----------



## 660griz

welderguy said:


> In essence, what you are saying to me is "tell me what the bible says about itself....oh but, by the way, forget all those pesky verses,...and also leave off any beliefs you may have about its meaning because belief is so irrelevant."
> 
> This conversation was doomed from the beginning. You have your fingers in your ears.



I bet I could post some pesky verses you would like to forget.


----------



## 660griz

welderguy said:


> So basically, by saying all this you are confirming that you not only do not believe, but cannot believe Jesus is the Son of God?



Jesus is the son of himself.
When he was dying, he prayed to himself. 

Asking himself why he had forsaken himself. 
Seems a little Koo koo for CoCo puffs to me.


----------



## Israel

Because you say, 'I am rich, and have gotten riches, and have need of nothing;' and don't know that you are the wretched one, miserable, poor, blind, and naked; I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, that you may become rich; and white garments, that you may clothe yourself, and that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and eye salve to anoint your eyes, that you may see.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> You are right. I'm using scripture for my proof because I believe wholeheartedly that it is truth. Believers argue on differences of interpretation but they agree that the Bible is truth.
> The disconnect comes when one such as you says the Bible is not truth. That's the dead end road.
> I can give you verse after verse "proving" what I believe, but at the end of the day you will just say "the Bible is not truth".
> Let's do an experiment.
> I make the declaration that you cannot believe Jesus is the Son of God without Him causing you to. Man-based religion says you can.
> Ok, prove me wrong. Let's see if you can.(this will take perfect honesty BTW).
> Perfect honesty? I don't have a problem with that.
> First, your argument seems to be with man based religion, not me. I have nothing to do with the fact that you don't agree with each other in your example.
> Based on the lack of facts neither one of you can be proven right or wrong. Based on the preponderance of the evidence, you are both wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> Believers argue on differences of interpretation but they agree that the Bible is truth.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes I agree believers agree the Bible is the truth.
> You jut don't agree in a number of areas what the truth is.
> Lotsa' denominations.
> Not because you agree on what the truth is.
> 
> So far you have claimed the meme to be inaccurate.
> Still waiting on you to back it up.
Click to expand...


----------



## 660griz

Israel said:


> that you are the wretched one, miserable, poor, blind, and naked; I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, that you may become rich; and white garments, that you may clothe yourself, and that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and eye salve to anoint your eyes, that you may see.



Makes perfect sense.(cents) 
Poor folks buying gold. Happens all the time.


----------



## bullethead

Israel said:


> Because you say, 'I am rich, and have gotten riches, and have need of nothing;' and don't know that you are the wretched one, miserable, poor, blind, and naked; I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, that you may become rich; and white garments, that you may clothe yourself, and that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and eye salve to anoint your eyes, that you may see.



Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us / He who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks."


----------



## 660griz

“The Lord on his part has forgiven your sin: you shall not die.  But since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed, the child born to you must surely die.”


----------



## bullethead

"So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead.Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds"
The Bible


----------



## bullethead

Israel said:


> Because you say, 'I am rich, and have gotten riches, and have need of nothing;' and don't know that you are the wretched one, miserable, poor, blind, and naked; I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, that you may become rich; and white garments, that you may clothe yourself, and that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and eye salve to anoint your eyes, that you may see.



Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries which are coming upon you. Your riches have rotted… Your gold and your silver have rusted; and their rust will… consume your flesh like fire. You have lived luxuriously on the earth and led a life of wanton pleasure; you have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> You are right. I'm using scripture for my proof because I believe wholeheartedly that it is truth. Believers argue on differences of interpretation but they agree that the Bible is truth.



If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters… he cannot be My disciple.


----------



## welderguy

Well, I'm back from lunch now but nothing happened. I still don't believe bullet is the son of God.
Bullet, is it like Ambush said, I'm not chosen?
I get that. So try it on someone who is chosen then.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Well, I'm back from lunch now but nothing happened. I still don't believe bullet is the son of God.
> Bullet, is it like Ambush said, I'm not chosen?
> I get that. So try it on someone who is chosen then.


I will decide when and how you will believe or not believe but you are wrong in thinking that nothing happened.
There is no trying on my part.
There is just doing.
My Will be done.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> I will decide when and how you will believe or not believe but you are wrong in thinking that nothing happened.
> There is no trying on my part.
> There is just doing.
> My Will be done.



Something happened? What exactly?
Are you saying that you caused me to believe, but I just don't know if I believe?


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Something happened? What exactly?
> Are you saying that you caused me to believe, but I just don't know if I believe?



All in time my son.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> All in time my son.



If you say you made me believe, but I still don't believe, then that leads me to believe that you really didn't make me believe. Otherwise I would believe....you following?


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> If you say you made me believe, but I still don't believe, then that leads me to believe that you really didn't make me believe. Otherwise I would believe....you following?




You are constantly asking questions to me in order to try to persuade me to prove myself to you.
It doesn't work that way.
Have faith.

I have already given you an answer.
Yes, No or Maybe


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> You are constantly asking questions to me in order to try to persuade me to prove myself to you.
> It doesn't work that way.
> Have faith.
> 
> I have already given you an answer.
> Yes, No or Maybe



If I'm an unbeliever, then there's no faith for me to have.
Faith must be given first before I can believe.

You're starting to sound like the false man-based religion.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> If I'm an unbeliever, then there's no faith for me to have.
> Faith must be given first before I can believe.
> 
> You're starting to sound like the false man-based religion.



Now now now...
You are starting to sound like many non-believers in that other god. 
Be patient.
Only I can choose you, not you me.

Right?


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Now now now...
> You are starting to sound like many non-believers in that other god.
> Be patient.
> Only I can choose you, not you me.
> 
> Right?



But you already said something happened while I was at lunch. But I still don't believe and there's no faith whatsoever. Now you tell me I'm not chosen.

So what happened at lunch, just indigestion?


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> But you already said something happened while I was at lunch. But I still don't believe and there's no faith whatsoever. Now you tell me I'm not chosen.
> 
> So what happened at lunch, just indigestion?


No, you are reading too much into it. You are jumping to conclusions.

Welder you cannot possibly understand the realm or complexity in which I do my work.

Just know that the only way to me is by my choosing.
I know that you want immediate results over a span of a lunch break. As a human that sounds reasonable. A million years to me is much less than that lunch break.
Be patient.

I decide.
That is how it works.
Right?


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> No, you are reading too much into it. You are jumping to conclusions.
> 
> Welder you cannot possibly understand the realm or complexity in which I do my work.
> 
> Just know that the only way to me is by my choosing.
> I know that you want immediate results over a span of a lunch break. As a human that sounds reasonable. A million years to me is much less than that lunch break.
> Be patient.
> 
> I decide.
> That is how it works.
> Right?



That sounds so wishy washy to me. Think I'll stick with the true God of the Bible. He explains belief so much more plainly and there's no guesswork involved.

John 3:18
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.

To be condemned already before your unbelief. How do you think that's​ possible.(hint: election before creation)


----------



## SemperFiDawg

WaltL1 said:


> The Bible/Christianity is at its foundation a reward/punishment system.



Close, but not quiet accurate.  Actually it's a justice system.  We have all transgressed against a Holy God.  He will gladly forgive, given one is truly sorry, acknowledges his sacrifice (what it cost him), and simply ask.  Those who do, are forgiven.  Those who don't, aren't. It's an individual decision and that is who is held responsible for it.
It's not a "proof" of anything, just a more accurate description of Christianity that the reward/punishment theory.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> You have it totally backwards. Jesus is the door of the sheep(John 10). He's the One that opens and shuts it only for His chosen sheep. No goats allowed.



OH BROTHER.  Welder, with all due respect, if you believe that some are chosen and others are not, that salvation is not available to any who truly "open the door" why spend so much time down here trying to convince people who are obviously "not chosen"?  By your own admission, you're wasting your time.  Christ DIDN'T QUALIFY the invitation you speak of in Revelation.  He said 'I knock.   If ANY open the door I will come in and dine with them.'  Can't you look around and see the problems that belief causes in places like this?


----------



## centerpin fan

bullethead said:


> You are constantly asking questions to me in order to try to persuade me to prove myself to you.
> It doesn't work that way.
> Have faith.
> 
> I have already given you an answer.
> Yes, No or Maybe





welderguy said:


> You're starting to sound like the false man-based religion.



Cut it out, bullethead.  False, man-based religion is my department.


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> OH BROTHER.  Welder, with all due respect, if you believe that some are chosen and others are not, that salvation is not available to any who truly "open the door" why spend so much time down here trying to convince people who are obviously "not chosen"?  By your own admission, you're wasting your time.  Christ DIDN'T QUALIFY the invitation you speak of in Revelation.  He said 'I knock.   If ANY open the door I will come in and dine with them.'  Can't you look around and see the problems that belief causes in places like this?



I'm really interested in learning how you know if someone is chosen or not.

And the reason I come down here sometimes is to take a little break from the Arminianism that is so prevalent upstairs.(but I see it has followed me)


----------



## SemperFiDawg

NCHillbilly said:


> According to the Bible, the default switch for humans is set to "burn in horrible everlasting torment" unless you seek out and accept Jesus. Pretty much exactly what that picture says. I am condemned to everlasting torment because some woman a few thousand years ago had a conversation with a talking snake.  True grace would not make "burn in he11" the default setting. It's pretty twisted and unfair if you ask me.



Not exactly.  With regards to the default switch tripped 
by the woman eons ago, it only created a fallen environment where man is to live side by side with sin.  There were 2 that were declared righteous in the OT.  Granted that's not many, but it raises an important point.  If people COULD be declared righteous, even one, then it's feasible NOT to sin.  That's important, because the rest of us have, and are guilty of it, so it's NOT accurate to say Burn in He!! is the default setting.  It's not, and there's absolutely nothing unjust for you/me being held accountable for transgressing.  It would be unjust if we weren't..........if Hitler, Jeffery Dahlmer and even me were to get away with our wrongs scot free.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> I'm really interested in learning how you know if someone is chosen or not.
> 
> And the reason I come down here sometimes is to take a little break from the Arminianism that is so prevalent upstairs.(but I see it has followed me)





> I'm really interested in learning how you know if someone is chosen or not.



Not as interested as I am in understanding why someone who believes in it bothers evangelizing.  If these A/As down here have no free will to choose, what hope can you give them?  If their fate is already written, what you are doing is just tormenting them.  




> And the reason I come down here sometimes is to take a little break from the Arminianism that is so prevalent upstairs.(but I see it has followed me)facepalm



It came with you.  When you state a thesis, you automatically deny the antithesis.  

Honestly, I just don't understand why you bother.  Now if you were going to some remote region where Christianity was never introduced, yeah, I can see where you might could justify determinism, but most of these guys know the story better than many Christians, even if they do tend to twist it a bit from time to time.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

centerpin fan said:


> a/k/a "historic christianity"



That's funny.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> well, i'm back from lunch now but nothing happened. I still don't believe bullet is the son of god.
> Bullet, is it like ambush said, i'm not chosen?
> I get that. So try it on someone who is chosen then.



oh.  Choose me!  Me! Me! Me!   Me!!!!!!


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> Not as interested as I am in understanding why someone who believes in it bothers evangelizing.  If these A/As down here have no free will to choose, what hope can you give them?  If their fate is already written, what you are doing is just tormenting them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It came with you.  When you state a thesis, you automatically deny the antithesis.
> 
> Honestly, I just don't understand why you bother.  Now if you were going to some remote region where Christianity was never introduced, yeah, I can see where you might could justify determinism, but most of these guys know the story better than many Christians, even if they do tend to twist it a bit from time to time.



First of all,election/predestination is biblical. Also, there's far more hope in knowing my salvation is based solely on Jesus' work than something man must do. If it depends on something/anything we must do, then there's zero hope for anyone.

Second, why do you keep making the judgement that these guys down here are all destined for eternal torment? How do you know this?
Besides, I'm not evangelizing anyone. Just having a good time conversing with folks. I can't get anyone saved. That's God's  work, not mine. I can relate to these guys because I was once an unbeliever also.
If that's not hope, what is? If someone like me could be changed, anybody could be. It's up to Him.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> That sounds so wishy washy to me. Think I'll stick with the true God of the Bible. He explains belief so much more plainly and there's no guesswork involved.
> 
> John 3:18
> 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.
> 
> To be condemned already before your unbelief. How do you think that's​ possible.(hint: election before creation)


You have free will to choose any god that you want to but there can be no other gods before me. 

Man explained belief to you. The god you worship cannot even write.

John 3:18 is about me. I had them put it in a way that you can understand but it is really about me.  You will see when you die.

Please do not insult your own intelligence by giving me hints. I already am all knowledgeable. I knew you since the beginning of time. Know that you are following the script that I have written for you.


----------



## WaltL1

SemperFiDawg said:


> Close, but not quiet accurate.  Actually it's a justice system.  We have all transgressed against a Holy God.  He will gladly forgive, given one is truly sorry, acknowledges his sacrifice (what it cost him), and simply ask.  Those who do, are forgiven.  Those who don't, aren't. It's an individual decision and that is who is held responsible for it.
> It's not a "proof" of anything, just a more accurate description of Christianity that the reward/punishment theory.


Meh.


> He will gladly forgive, given one is truly sorry, acknowledges his sacrifice (what it cost him), and simply ask.  Those who do, are forgiven.


In other words, those who do are rewarded with forgiveness.
Those who don't are punished by his forgiveness being with held (and other uncomfortable things).
Reward/Punishment.


----------



## WaltL1

bullethead said:


> You have free will to choose any god that you want to but there can be no other gods before me.
> 
> Man explained belief to you. The god you worship cannot even write.
> 
> John 3:18 is about me. I had them put it in a way that you can understand but it is really about me.  You will see when you die.
> 
> Please do not insult your own intelligence by giving me hints. I already am all knowledgeable. I knew you since the beginning of time. Know that you are following the script that I have written for you.


To make your claim legit, you have to write a book.
Tell you what, you are probably busy so I'll write it for you but I'll say you inspired me. 
If there is a book, maybe The Book of Bullet, well then its just gotta be true.


----------



## bullethead

WaltL1 said:


> To make your claim legit, you have to write a book.
> Tell you what, you are probably busy so I'll write it for you but I'll say you inspired me.
> If there is a book, maybe The Book of Bullet, well then its just gotta be true.



Do you think that you got that idea all on your own?


----------



## Israel

Will a man be moved by a word? Eat all...except this one thing, in it is death.
Oh, a word is not sufficient?
Then experience must be the teacher.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

WaltL1 said:


> Meh.
> 
> In other words, those who do are rewarded with forgiveness.
> Those who don't are punished by his forgiveness being with held (and other uncomfortable things).
> Reward/Punishment.



Meh.  Yeah in the same way a murderer is punished by the judge not letting him walk.  Gotta twist the truth to make it fit.  Just curious, but does it ever bother you that you have to do that in order to hold to your beliefs.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

Israel said:


> Will a man be moved by a word? Eat all...except this one thing, in it is death.
> Oh, a word is not sufficient?
> Then experience must be the teacher.


----------



## NCHillbilly

SemperFiDawg said:


> Not exactly.  With regards to the default switch tripped
> by the woman eons ago, it only created a fallen environment where man is to live side by side with sin.  There were 2 that were declared righteous in the OT.  Granted that's not many, but it raises an important point.  If people COULD be declared righteous, even one, then it's feasible NOT to sin.  That's important, because the rest of us have, and are guilty of it, so it's NOT accurate to say Burn in He!! is the default setting.  It's not, and there's absolutely nothing unjust for you/me being held accountable for transgressing.  It would be unjust if we weren't..........if Hitler, Jeffery Dahlmer and even me were to get away with our wrongs scot free.



OK, then tell me what happens to me in this case: I am not Dahmer or Hitler. I'm a good guy. I live a good life and help people. But, I never get saved and accept Jesus into my heart. What happens to me when I die? What if I live on myself back on a mountain and I never hear of Jesus? What happens to me when I die? 

I can tell you what every preacher I have heard in my life, including the one who raised me, has to say about it. "Burn in He11" is indeed the default setting according to the Bible. You must do something (get saved,) in order to avoid it, whether you were Dahmer, Ugboo the isolated Pacific Islander, or Al the shoe salesman; and whether you were a good man or a wicked one. Also remember, God made us the way we are and then condemns us to fiery torment for behaving exactly like he made us. Why create someone, instill the will to sin into then by design, then punish them for sinning? Sounds like one of them fellers who likes to pull the wings off of flies and watch them spin around on the table.


----------



## welderguy

NCHillbilly said:


> OK, then tell me what happens to me in this case: I am not Dahmer or Hitler. I'm a good guy. I live a good life and help people. But, I never get saved and accept Jesus into my heart. What happens to me when I die? What if I live on myself back on a mountain and I never hear of Jesus? What happens to me when I die?
> 
> I can tell you what every preacher I have heard in my life, including the one who raised me, has to say about it. "Burn in He11" is indeed the default setting according to the Bible. You must do something (get saved,) in order to avoid it, whether you were Dahmer, Ugboo the isolated Pacific Islander, or Al the shoe salesman; and whether you were a good man or a wicked one. Also remember, God made us the way we are and then condemns us to fiery torment for behaving exactly like he made us. Why create someone, instill the will to sin into then by design, then punish them for sinning? Sounds like one of them fellers who likes to pull the wings off of flies and watch them spin around on the table.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

NCHillbilly said:


> OK, then tell me what happens to me in this case: I am not Dahmer or Hitler. I'm a good guy. I live a good life and help people. But, I never get saved and accept Jesus into my heart. What happens to me when I die? What if I live on myself back on a mountain and I never hear of Jesus? What happens to me when I die?
> 
> I can tell you what every preacher I have heard in my life, including the one who raised me, has to say about it. "Burn in He11" is indeed the default setting according to the Bible. You must do something (get saved,) in order to avoid it, whether you were Dahmer, Ugboo the isolated Pacific Islander, or Al the shoe salesman; and whether you were a good man or a wicked one. Also remember, God made us the way we are and then condemns us to fiery torment for behaving exactly like he made us. Why create someone, instill the will to sin into then by design, then punish them for sinning? Sounds like one of them fellers who likes to pull the wings off of flies and watch them spin around on the table.



It isn't uncommon for Christians to pick and choose scripture, practicing isolationism in the name of inclusivism. That does not however cover the entire content of the Old and New testament. To ignore one, is to ignore both aka to worship only the God of the New Testament is a travesty, throwing off both the merciful yet punishing God of the old testament. 

If there is one set of scriptures that covers the bases of which your questions boundaries explore it would be in the book of Ecclesiastes 3. 


*A Time for Everything*
3 There is a time for everything,
    and a season for every activity under the heavens:
2     a time to be born and a time to die,
    a time to plant and a time to uproot,
3     a time to kill and a time to heal,
    a time to tear down and a time to build,
4     a time to weep and a time to laugh,
    a time to mourn and a time to dance,
5     a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,
    a time to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing,
6     a time to search and a time to give up,
    a time to keep and a time to throw away,
7     a time to tear and a time to mend,
    a time to be silent and a time to speak,
8     a time to love and a time to hate,
    a time for war and a time for peace.
9 What do workers gain from their toil? 10 I have seen the burden God has laid on the human race. 11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the human heart; yet[a] no one can fathom what God has done from beginning to end. 12 I know that there is nothing better for people than to be happy and to do good while they live. 13 That each of them may eat and drink, and find satisfaction in all their toil—this is the gift of God. 14 I know that everything God does will endure forever; nothing can be added to it and nothing taken from it. God does it so that people will fear him.

15 Whatever is has already been,
    and what will be has been before;
    and God will call the past to account.*
16 And I saw something else under the sun:

In the place of judgment—wickedness was there,
    in the place of justice—wickedness was there.
17 I said to myself,

“God will bring into judgment
    both the righteous and the wicked,
for there will be a time for every activity,
    a time to judge every deed.”
18 I also said to myself, “As for humans, God tests them so that they may see that they are like the animals. 19 Surely the fate of human beings is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath[c]; humans have no advantage over animals. Everything is meaningless. 20 All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return. 21 Who knows if the human spirit rises upward and if the spirit of the animal goes down into the earth?”

22 So I saw that there is nothing better for a person than to enjoy their work, because that is their lot. For who can bring them to see what will happen after them?


But then, by me posting this, many will say I am picking and choosing scripture to fit an agenda. We are all creations of God, and he has set the knowledge of Him in our hearts. Yet it is our free will to do good or do evil and all will be judged for that in the end. 

As for those that never hear of Jesus or the Salvation he brought us, that penalty will fall upon those that know of Christ and fail to abide by the Great Commission, not those that were deprived of it. 

Many a well intended Christian, even preachers, will fall into the trap of inclusivism when answering your query. By the same token, many well intended Christians will be judged by God in the end in a manner that may not be as favorable to their liking based on their errant understanding of the scripture, and the manner in which they lived their life, treated others and narrowly judged others, hating the sinner, instead of showing the sinner love and hating only the sin.*


----------



## SemperFiDawg

NCHillbilly said:


> OK, then tell me what happens to me in this case: I am not Dahmer or Hitler. I'm a good guy. I live a good life and help people. But, I never get saved and accept Jesus into my heart. What happens to me when I die? What if I live on myself back on a mountain and I never hear of Jesus? What happens to me when I die?



NCHB. I'm gonna say this out of respect.  I have my reasons for it and we can discuss it via PM if you want to know why.   I'm gonna give it to you straight.  I'm sure you are a good person, maybe even great (at least in my estimation), but there's one thing you're not, and neither is anyone else....HOLY.  You have sinned, I have sinned ( probably more and worse than most.  My sin bothers me EVERY ...SINGLE.....DAY.  You're doesn't .  I just know you're not perfect and that's the key.  You/we have sinned against a Holy God and the punishment for that is eternal death.   God has provided a way out.  He died for us and paid the penalty for our sins.  (If you want to get into the how's and whys we can).  It's a free gift from
Him to us.  If you don't accept the gift it's TOTALLY your choice.  It's a PERSONAL decision, but the gift is there for you.  It's been bought and paid for.  If you don't accept it, it's your fault.  No different than a present I bought for your you and told you about.  You walk away from it, it's nobody's fault but yours.  It's totally personal accountability.

As far as "if you never heard of Christ", that used to bother me too.  Bottom line is people who have never heard of Christ still have a conscious and are judged based on how well they adhered to it.   I often think it would be easier that way,  unfortunately/fortunately me and you have.


----------



## bullethead

A problem I have with this "gift" is that it is made known to us through writings of men just like every other religion. It comes down to which story an individual buys into, or doesn't.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

bullethead said:


> A problem I have with this "gift" is that it is made known to us through writings of men just like every other religion. It comes down to which story an individual buys into, or doesn't.



THE problem you have with this gift is a heart issue as it is with accepting any gift.   Call it what you may, it's a lie plain and simple.  You can play paddy-cake all you want.  The time WILL come when you acknowledge Christ.  Now bring on the wailing and gnashing of teeth.


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> THE problem you have with this gift is a heart issue as it is with accepting any gift.   Call it what you may, it's a lie plain and simple.  You can play paddy-cake all you want.  The time WILL come when you acknowledge Christ.  Now bring on the wailing and gnashing of teeth.



Like I said.


----------



## welderguy




----------



## Israel

Touching the core for men is a skill set developed, for God, it is His sole manner of relating. It would seem (if I have heard some of you rightly, and for now, just to the AAA forum) that you present what for you is an objection, but which I rather see in a form of a truth, or at least not a negating of anything I hold. It has more or less taken the form of "a god would be universally and fundamentally (or should be) recognizable...(with the proviso) 'if he exists' " 

In other words, to be the 'true' God his knowledge of being, and the knowledge of his being at all, that is,  His existing (if there be any 'fairness", so to speak, in him at all if there is indeed a constraint to 'know him' as a right response) would have to be, in some manner, universally apprehendable. By man. All men. Everywhere, and at all times.

"You shall seek me and you shall find me when you search for me with all your heart"

 "I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me."

The same God. The only God.


----------



## bullethead

SemperFiDawg said:


> THE problem you have with this gift is a heart issue as it is with accepting any gift.   Call it what you may, it's a lie plain and simple.  You can play paddy-cake all you want.  The time WILL come when you acknowledge Christ.  Now bring on the wailing and gnashing of teeth.


Sfd, you act as if the entire population on the planet knows your god is real and the majority doesn't believe it out of denial.
The only lies in here are the guys who not only pretend to know anything about a god but then go into details and speak for such an entity and there isn't one person, especially you, that is honest enough to admit that all of their god delusions are self made. 
You are trying to atone for whatever you did in the past and or still do now and cant deal with it without pretending that you have some inside scoop with a make believe figure of authority that still loves you anyway.
Your dishonesty to yourself is more disturbing than your snotty attitude towards others who just do not buy into your chicken little routine.


----------



## ambush80

Israel said:


> Touching the core for men is a skill set developed, for God, it is His sole manner of relating. It would seem (if I have heard some of you rightly, and for now, just to the AAA forum) that you present what for you is an objection, but which I rather see in a form of a truth, or at least not a negating of anything I hold. It has more or less taken the form of "a god would be universally and fundamentally (or should be) recognizable...(with the proviso) 'if he exists' "
> 
> In other words, to be the 'true' God his knowledge of being, and the knowledge of his being at all, that is,  His existing (if there be any 'fairness", so to speak, in him at all if there is indeed a constraint to 'know him' as a right response) would have to be, in some manner, universally apprehendable. By man. All men. Everywhere, and at all times.
> 
> "You shall seek me and you shall find me when you search for me with all your heart"
> 
> "I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me."
> 
> The same God. The only God.



Of course a God can and would operate anyway that it would choose to, but the God(s) described by men are mythologies based on tens maybe hundreds of thousands of years of human experience.  The trail of evidence is glaring.  One should recognize the useful, allegorical parts of any mythology but not think it actually happened.


----------



## NCHillbilly

SemperFiDawg said:


> NCHB. I'm gonna say this out of respect.  I have my reasons for it and we can discuss it via PM if you want to know why.   I'm gonna give it to you straight.  I'm sure you are a good person, maybe even great (at least in my estimation), but there's one thing you're not, and neither is anyone else....HOLY.  You have sinned, I have sinned ( probably more and worse than most.  My sin bothers me EVERY ...SINGLE.....DAY.  You're doesn't .  I just know you're not perfect and that's the key.  You/we have sinned against a Holy God and the punishment for that is eternal death.   God has provided a way out.  He died for us and paid the penalty for our sins.  (If you want to get into the how's and whys we can).  It's a free gift from
> Him to us.  If you don't accept the gift it's TOTALLY your choice.  It's a PERSONAL decision, but the gift is there for you.  It's been bought and paid for.  If you don't accept it, it's your fault.  No different than a present I bought for your you and told you about.  You walk away from it, it's nobody's fault but yours.  It's totally personal accountability.
> 
> As far as "if you never heard of Christ", that used to bother me too.  Bottom line is people who have never heard of Christ still have a conscious and are judged based on how well they adhered to it.   I often think it would be easier that way,  unfortunately/fortunately me and you have.



I have never claimed to be holy, nor ever had any illusions of being so. I am nowhere near holy. I'm very imperfect, but generally a good-enough guy, like the majority of folks. I still don't see why a loving god would decree that I should have to burn in horrible torment for eternity because he created me to be imperfect, then punishes me for my imperfections.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

ambush80 said:


> Like I said.



Yeah because if you can't confront the truth, offer up a caricature.....a lie.    Again it's a heart issue.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

NCHillbilly said:


> I have never claimed to be holy, nor ever had any illusions of being so. I am nowhere near holy. I'm very imperfect, but generally a good-enough guy, like the majority of folks. I still don't see why a loving god would decree that I should have to burn in horrible torment for eternity because he created me to be imperfect, then punishes me for my imperfections.



He didn't creat you to be imperfect.  We are all created in his image....perfect.  You were sinless the day you were born, but living in a dirty world (since the fall) we (almost) all get soiled somewhere along the way.  He knew this and therefore provided a way to clean us, bring us back
to our intended state.  If you refuse then it's not accurate to say he's unjust punishing you, no more so than a criminal crying foul to a judge who sentences him.  You chose.  Again it's individual accountability.


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> He didn't creat you to be imperfect.  We are all created in his image....perfect.  You were sinless the day you were born, but living in a dirty world (since the fall) we (almost) all get soiled somewhere along the way.  He knew this and therefore provided a way to clean us, bring us back
> to our intended state.  If you refuse then it's not accurate to say he's punishing you, no more so than a criminal crying foul to a judge who sentences him.  You chose.  Again it's individual accountability.



You keep bringing up the 'Judge" analogy.  I reject the premise of the law as unjust.  What do you think a court would do with a law that stated "Worship me or burn in He11"?  A law like that goes against everything we hold as just.  It's incompatible with morality.


----------



## bullethead

SemperFiDawg said:


> Yeah because if you can't confront the truth, offer up a caricature.....a lie.    Again it's a heart issue.



"Can't  confront the truth....a lie...."

Says Pinoccio...


----------



## welderguy

SFD's religion says God loves everybody, yet some will be eternally separated from Him.

He must have ripped out Rom.8:35-39 from his bible.


----------



## bullethead

The great thing about using the bible is that pages do not have to be missing. Followers have the knack for being able to pick out the ones that fit and ignore the ones that directly counter what fits.


----------



## Israel

NCHillbilly said:


> I have never claimed to be holy, nor ever had any illusions of being so. I am nowhere near holy. I'm very imperfect, but generally a good-enough guy, like the majority of folks. I still don't see why a loving god would decree that I should have to burn in horrible torment for eternity because he created me to be imperfect, then punishes me for my imperfections.


The knowledge that you appear to yourself as imperfect, do you believe it is of yourself? How could a thing appear imperfect to itself....of itself?


----------



## SemperFiDawg

ambush80 said:


> What do you think a court would do with a law that stated "Worship me or burn in He11"? .



You know.  If there was a law Athiest couldn't argue caricatures,  no one would ever know you guys existed.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> SFD's religion says God loves everybody, yet some will be eternally separated from Him........



.....by their own choice.  You going into the caricature business too Brother?

Tell me something Brother.  Look around down here.  You see any Athiest being held to their beliefs against their will or do they believe what they do because they have chosen too.  Been down here a while now and I have yet to find ONE A/A who won't tell you HE PERSONALLY MADE HIS DECISION based on..........


----------



## SemperFiDawg

bullethead said:


> Sfd, you act as if the entire population on the planet knows your god is real and the majority doesn't believe it out of denial.
> The only lies in here are the guys who not only pretend to know anything about a god but then go into details and speak for such an entity and there isn't one person, especially you, that is honest enough to admit that all of their god delusions are self made.
> You are trying to atone for whatever you did in the past and or still do now and cant deal with it without pretending that you have some inside scoop with a make believe figure of authority that still loves you anyway.
> Your dishonesty to yourself is more disturbing than your snotty attitude towards others who just do not buy into your chicken little routine.



The only god delusion that is self-made is you.


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> .....by their own choice.  You going into the caricature business too Brother?
> 
> Tell me something Brother.  Look around down here.  You see any Athiest being held to their beliefs against their will or do they believe what they do because they have chosen too.  Been down here a while now and I have yet to find ONE A/A who won't tell you HE PERSONALLY MADE HIS DECISION based on..........



So you're telling me that God loves every person up until the point that they reject Him? At this point, He suddenly stops loving them and condemns them to be separated from Him?

That is not an everlasting love (Jer31:3),and it still contradicts Rom.8:35-39.
Am I missing something?


----------



## WaltL1

SemperFiDawg said:


> Meh.  Yeah in the same way a murderer is punished by the judge not letting him walk.  Gotta twist the truth to make it fit.  Just curious, but does it ever bother you that you have to do that in order to hold to your beliefs.


You say the silliest things sometimes.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> So you're telling me that God loves every person up until the point that they reject Him? At this point, He suddenly stops loving them and condemns them to be separated from Him?
> 
> That is not an everlasting love (Jer31:3),and it still contradicts Rom.8:35-39.
> Am I missing something?


Doesn't make a whole lot of sense does it?
The kicker is he actually never stops loving them. He's sad he has to separate you. He's sad he's going to send you to a torturous forever. He's sad you just wouldn't worship him.
But you know, what choice does he have?


----------



## bullethead

SemperFiDawg said:


> The only god delusion that is self-made is you.



I'll start to think of you as credible the second you can back up anything that you constantly claim.

Anyone can say anything that they want to, in fact you might be the best. But only the credible people can back it up. And that is where you fail in every post.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> Am I missing something?



Are these ambiguous concerning who God wishes to save?

1 Tim 2

First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, 2 for kings and all who are in [a]authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and *dignity. 3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the [c]knowledge of the truth. 


John 3:16New American Standard Bible (NASB)

16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His [a]only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.


2 Peter 3:9New International Version (NIV)

9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.*


----------



## SemperFiDawg

WaltL1 said:


> Doesn't make a whole lot of sense does it?
> The kicker is he actually never stops loving them. He's sad he has to separate you. He's sad he's going to send you to a torturous forever. He's sad you just wouldn't worship him.
> But you know, what choice does he have?



Welder do you now see why strict predeterminism is problematic.  If it's true then what Walt said is a logical conclusion to reach.


----------



## bullethead

A god who comes to the only solution to save humans is to send himself to be sacrificed who isn't going to spend eternity in h3ll but will go to heaven instead is problematic.
What hardship. 
What a sacrifice. 
What a 2000 year old best attempt.


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> Welder do you now see why strict predeterminism is problematic.  If it's true then what Walt said is a logical conclusion to reach.



The problem isn't Welder's or Gemcgrew's or the recently Artfuldodger's ability to reason logically.  They have come to the proper conclusion given the terribly written, self contradicting Bible that they have to go by.  

Predestination is the ONLY logical conclusion to come to given Omniscience and Omnipotence.  Anyone who doesn't come that conclusion isn't being logical.  Whatever God does is 'good' and 'righteous', even if it means that he created Vessels of Wrath.  You best figure out a way to come to grips with that like they did.  

No.  It's not fair by our standards but that's the God you chose (or were molded by The Potter) to believe in.


----------



## ambush80

bullethead said:


> A god who comes to the only solution to save humans is to send himself to be sacrificed who isn't going to spend eternity in h3ll but will go to heaven instead is problematic.
> What hardship.
> What a sacrifice.
> What a 2000 year old best attempt.



It's a terrible attempt.  We could improve upon it in five minutes in such a way that it would immediately begin to improve lives.


----------



## bullethead

ambush80 said:


> It's a terrible attempt.  We could improve upon it in five minutes in such a way that it would immediately begin to improve lives.



1900 and some odd years ago that was a romantic way to catch potential followers out of fear and need who didnt have the education to read it or the resources to check it.
1900+years later fear and need is still the driving source so much so that the available resources go unused and ignored.

It is a shame that people worship something that was limited to the powers of men.


----------



## ambush80

bullethead said:


> 1900 and some odd years ago that was a romantic way to catch potential followers out of fear and need who didnt have the education to read it or the resources to check it.
> 1900+years later fear and need is still the driving source so much so that the available resources go unused and ignored.



It's been tempered by secularism (thank God) and continues to be.  Although we all hate to see them cherry pick from the Bible, do we REALLY want them to follow it to the letter?  I certainly don't.  I think what we would really like to see them do is cherry pick it until it looks like Jefferson's Bible.


----------



## bullethead

ambush80 said:


> It's been tempered by secularism (thank God) and continues to be.  Although we all hate to see them cherry pick from the Bible, do we REALLY want them to follow it to the letter?  I certainly don't.  I think what we would really like to see them do is cherry pick it until it looks like Jefferson's Bible.


The fact that nobody follows it to the letter and why is telling.
The word god when needed. Outdated text and ancient ways when convenient.

Id respect them more if some in here followed it to the letter. Well, I'd at least send them phone cards while they were in prison...


----------



## ky55

ambush80 said:


> I think what we would really like to see them do is cherry pick it until it looks like Jefferson's Bible.



Yep, and the new-age charismatic prosperity "pastors" like Joel Osteen and Paula White have their flocks heading down that road at breakneck speed.


----------



## ambush80

bullethead said:


> The fact that nobody follows it to the letter and why is telling.
> The word god when needed. Outdated text and ancient ways when convenient.
> 
> Id respect them more if some in here followed it to the letter. Well, I'd at least send them phone cards while they were in prison...



I wouldn't mind if they followed MOST of it to the letter.  Turning all the Baptists into Amish would be nice.  It sure would reduce some of the bassboat traffic and competition in the deerwoods.


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> Are these ambiguous concerning who God wishes to save?
> 
> 1 Tim 2
> 
> First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, 2 for kings and all who are in [a]authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and *dignity. 3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the [c]knowledge of the truth.
> 
> 
> John 3:16New American Standard Bible (NASB)
> 
> 16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His [a]only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
> 
> 
> 2 Peter 3:9New International Version (NIV)
> 
> 9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.*


*


Your 1 Tim.2 reference:
"All", meaning, all manner of men  "OUT OF every kindred and tongue and people and nation"
That's who Timothy was being charged to go preach to.

Your John 3:16 reference:
This verse is not an invitation, contrary to alot of opinions, it is a declaration. It is saying that those that will not perish are those that will believe.(they are predestined to do both)

Your 2 Pet.3:9 reference:
This one cannot mean "all/every" human being either, because verse 7 says some are reserved for perdition and fire. This promise Peter spoke of was not for them.*


----------



## bullethead

The work of a god cannot even get two grown men to agree on what is meant by the work. 
Very, un-godlike...


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> The work of a god cannot even get two grown men to agree on what is meant by the work.
> Very, un-godlike...



We both agree that Jesus is the Son of God. And because of that, he is my brother.
Did you not ever have a harmless disagreement with your natural brother?(if you had one)
Did it make you no longer brothers,or more importantly, did it make you no longer sons?


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> We both agree that Jesus is the Son of God. And because of that, he is my brother.
> Did you not ever have a harmless disagreement with your natural brother?(if you had one)
> Did it make you no longer brothers,or more importantly, did it make you no longer sons?


Bud, if you equate me disagreeing with someone else about which route to take, politics or favorite sports teams with two people and/or millions of people being unable to equally understand the work of god then I totally see how unimportant and unimpressive the works of your god really is.

I mean can we all agree that the Braves are a major league baseball team but we differ on which team is the best which is CLEARLY the same as agreeing that Jesus is the son of God but the word of god in his handbook is non universal in understanding.

For the zillionth time, shouldn't the work of anything even remotely being called a god be unquestionable and universal in understaning by everyone including the hardest critics? Absolute truth is undeniable.
Or
Is it realistic to overlook the inconsistency, multiple interpretations, and contradictions of what you say is literally THE word of god because, well, we all believe who his son is?

C'mon man


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Bud, if you equate me disagreeing with someone else about which route to take, politics or favorite sports teams with two people and/or millions of people being unable to equally understand the work of god then I totally see how unimportant and unimpressive the works of your god really is.
> 
> I mean can we all agree that the Braves are a major league baseball team but we differ on which team is the best which is CLEARLY the same as agreeing that Jesus is the son of God but the word of god in his handbook is non universal in understanding.
> 
> For the zillionth time, shouldn't the work of anything even remotely being called a god be unquestionable and universal in understaning by everyone including the hardest critics? Absolute truth is undeniable.
> Or
> Is it realistic to overlook the inconsistency, multiple interpretations, and contradictions of what you say is literally THE word of god because, well, we all believe who his son is?
> 
> C'mon man



You want to know what I really think? I think there are so many layers to the Word of God(scriptures),kinda like peeling back an onion, that it can be simple at certain layers(even a child can understand),but the further you dig into it, the deeper and complex it gets. It's infinitely genius the way it is written in an interwoven complexity. It requires the Holy Spirit to understand the truth of it, on every level, even the simple layers. It has the ability(obviously) to confound even the wisest of men, and to make wise even the basest of men. Sure, men constantly debate the details of it, but that's because we are Jesus' disciples; we are learning and re-learning. We need each other to constantly sharpen one another's iron, so to speak. One may have insight on part of it that another doesn't, but we must check up on one another to see if there are no contradictions to the rest of scripture. If there is, it's false insight.
I'm addicted to it. Sometimes it consumes me. I need more and more. I'm like a heroine-addict sometimes.


----------



## Israel

What instruction of Jesus Christ or exhortation to obedience to Him by the writers of the New Testament do any find _jail-worthy_?

Or so "off the wall" as need, in their opinion...tempering?
What do you see, if in your knowing, it has been made known to you...Jesus Christ is indeed a dangerous man. To what, to whom?


----------



## bullethead

Israel said:


> What instruction of Jesus Christ or exhortation to obedience to Him by the writers of the New Testament do any find _jail-worthy_?
> 
> Or so "off the wall" as need, in their opinion...tempering?
> What do you see, if in your knowing, it has been made known to you...Jesus Christ is indeed a dangerous man. To what, to whom?



Are you just a New Testament follower?
Remind me, is Jesus and god the same, different, kind of the same, the same when needed, different when needed?

Is the entire bible the word of god ir just the New Testament?

Clear that up for me and then we can go into jailable specifics.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> You want to know what I really think? I think there are so many layers to the Word of God(scriptures),kinda like peeling back an onion, that it can be simple at certain layers(even a child can understand),but the further you dig into it, the deeper and complex it gets. It's infinitely genius the way it is written in an interwoven complexity. It requires the Holy Spirit to understand the truth of it, on every level, even the simple layers. It has the ability(obviously) to confound even the wisest of men, and to make wise even the basest of men. Sure, men constantly debate the details of it, but that's because we are Jesus' disciples; we are learning and re-learning. We need each other to constantly sharpen one another's iron, so to speak. One may have insight on part of it that another doesn't, but we must check up on one another to see if there are no contradictions to the rest of scripture. If there is, it's false insight.
> I'm addicted to it. Sometimes it consumes me. I need more and more. I'm like a heroine-addict sometimes.


Welder, whatever you have to say, however you need to sugar coat it in order to justify the ungodliness that makes up your bible.


----------



## Israel

bullethead said:


> Are you just a New Testament follower?
> Remind me, is Jesus and god the same, different, kind of the same, the same when needed, different when needed?
> 
> Is the entire bible the word of god ir just the New Testament?
> 
> Clear that up for me and then we can go into jailable specifics.



Jesus Christ is the word of God. The writings...are the writings.


----------



## NCHillbilly

bullethead said:


> Are you just a New Testament follower?
> Remind me, is Jesus and god the same, different, kind of the same, the same when needed, different when needed?
> 
> Is the entire bible the word of god ir just the New Testament?
> 
> Clear that up for me and then we can go into jailable specifics.



I could never understand the Covenant view of why we can now happily eat pigs and shrimp and make garments from mixed fibers, but we still can't make unto us graven images or bear false witness. And we can no longer sell our daughters as slaves or take female captives as slaves during war; but we can now plant two kinds of seed in the same field and trim the corners of our beards and hair on the sides of our heads, but we still can't mow the yard on Sunday? 

It's all quite confusing.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> We both agree that Jesus is the Son of God. And because of that, he is my brother.
> Did you not ever have a harmless disagreement with your natural brother?(if you had one)
> Did it make you no longer brothers, or more importantly, did it make you no longer sons?





> Did you not ever have a harmless disagreement with your natural brother?


You and your "brother" aren't disagreeing on whether peperoni or sausage is better on a pizza.
You think you are specially pre-chosen by God for a guaranteed "forever bliss".
He's telling you it doesn't work that way.

Harmless?
Not for one of you......


----------



## bullethead

Israel said:


> Jesus Christ is the word of God. The writings...are the writings.



Without the writings you are a full fledged follower of someone else.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> You and your "brother" aren't disagreeing on whether peperoni or sausage is better on a pizza.
> You think you are specially pre-chosen by God for a guaranteed "forever bliss".
> He's telling you it doesn't work that way.
> 
> Harmless?
> Not for one of you......



I see what you are saying, but here's why it is ultimately harmless. Even if one of us, or even both of us, are serving in ignorance, the thing that is ultimately essential, which is belief that Jesus is the Son of God, is present in both of us. That belief is not of ourselves. It was gifted to us by God. Whatever ignorance that may accompany that comes out in the wash(sanctification). This is why Jesus said "He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all."


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> I see what you are saying, but here's why it is ultimately harmless. Even if one of us, or even both of us, are serving in ignorance, the thing that is ultimately essential, which is belief that Jesus is the Son of God, is present in both of us. That belief is not of ourselves. It was gifted to us by God. Whatever ignorance that may accompany that comes out in the wash(sanctification). This is why Jesus said "He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all."



 yip.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> You want to know what I really think? I think there are so many layers to the Word of God(scriptures),kinda like peeling back an onion, that it can be simple at certain layers(even a child can understand),but the further you dig into it, the deeper and complex it gets. It's infinitely genius the way it is written in an interwoven complexity. It requires the Holy Spirit to understand the truth of it, on every level, even the simple layers. It has the ability(obviously) to confound even the wisest of men, and to make wise even the basest of men. Sure, men constantly debate the details of it, but that's because we are Jesus' disciples; we are learning and re-learning. We need each other to constantly sharpen one another's iron, so to speak. One may have insight on part of it that another doesn't, but we must check up on one another to see if there are no contradictions to the rest of scripture. If there is, it's false insight.
> I'm addicted to it. Sometimes it consumes me. I need more and more. I'm like a heroine-addict sometimes.





> we must check up on one another to see if there are no contradictions to the rest of scripture. If there is, it's false insight.


Ever watch a dog chase its tail?
You are trying to determine what is a false insight and you don't even know what is correct insight.
Its why you have so many denominations.
So many differing beliefs.
You can call it "checking up" on each other if you want.


----------



## ambush80

WaltL1 said:


> Ever watch a dog chase its tail?
> You are trying to determine what is a false insight and you don't even know what is correct insight.
> Its why you have so many denominations.
> So many differing beliefs.
> You can call it "checking up" on each other if you want.




"It's incomprehensible.  But I understand it."


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> I see what you are saying, but here's why it is ultimately harmless. Even if one of us, or even both of us, are serving in ignorance, the thing that is ultimately essential, which is belief that Jesus is the Son of God, is present in both of us. That belief is not of ourselves. It was gifted to us by God. Whatever ignorance that may accompany that comes out in the wash(sanctification). This is why Jesus said "He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all."


So what?
You both believe Jesus is the Son of God.
The Bible could have been written on a Post It note if that's all that mattered.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> So what?
> You both believe Jesus is the Son of God.
> The Bible could have been written on a Post It note if that's all that mattered.



I still think you're missing my point. The belief that Jesus is the Son of God does not come to a person by reading the bible. It comes by divine revelation of theSpirit. This is why unborn babies, secluded islanders, mentally handicapped, deaf, blind, etc, etc, are still very able to "know" Jesus. 
The bible is a bonus to this.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> I still think you're missing my point. The belief that Jesus is the Son of God does not come to a person by reading the bible. It comes by divine revelation of theSpirit. This is why unborn babies, secluded islanders, mentally handicapped, deaf, blind, etc, etc, are still very able to "know" Jesus.
> The bible is a bonus to this.


I understand your point perfectly.
You both believe Jesus is the Son of God.
So again I ask, so what?
Is that all there is? Is that all it takes?


----------



## WaltL1

ambush80 said:


> "It's incomprehensible.  But I understand it."


"The red berries are the good ones. The blue berries are the poisonous ones. Lets separate them".
Said one color blind person to the other color blind person......


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> I understand your point perfectly.
> You both believe Jesus is the Son of God.
> So again I ask, so what?
> Is that all there is? Is that all it takes?



You make so light of it, like it's no big deal.
Are you asking if that's all it takes to be saved?


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> You make so light of it, like it's no big deal.
> Are you asking if that's all it takes to be saved?


I didn't make light of anything.
You are the one injecting any emotion not me.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> I didn't make light of anything.
> You are the one injecting any emotion not me.



OK. sorry if I misinterpreted you.

To clarify:
If a person believes, that is not what saved him. That is the evidence that he has been saved, already. But these two things always go hand in hand.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> You make so light of it, like it's no big deal.
> Are you asking if that's all it takes to be saved?


You believe Jesus is the Son of God.
"He" believes Jesus is the Son of God.
You believe you were pre-chosen to believe that.
"He" believes ANYBODY can come to believe that.
Despite the fact you both believe Jesus is the Son of God, there are HUGE implications in the differences in your beliefs.
So for the 3rd time I ask - 
You both believe Jesus is the Son of God. So what?
Does that erase the huge implications in the differences of your beliefs?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

bullethead said:


> Without the writings you are a full fledged follower of someone else.



Without writings any historical knowledge is all a myth.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> You believe Jesus is the Son of God.
> "He" believes Jesus is the Son of God.
> You believe you were pre-chosen to believe that.
> "He" believes ANYBODY can come to believe that.
> Despite the fact you both believe Jesus is the Son of God, there are HUGE implications in the differences in your beliefs.
> So for the 3rd time I ask -
> You both believe Jesus is the Son of God. So what?
> Does that erase the huge implications in the differences of your beliefs?



I understand what you are asking, and it's a very legitimate question.
One of us (me or SFD) is wrong about the method of the belief, as in whether it's passive or active. I concede that. But at the end of the day, whether we understand how we believed accurately or not, it doesn't negate the fact that we both believe it. See one is of the mind, and one is of the Spirit. The one that's of the Spirit is the essential one.


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Without writings any historical knowledge is all a myth.



...Or an oral tradition.  Many myths are written down.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> ...Or an oral tradition.  Many myths are written down.



And exponentially more are spoken and not recorded in writing.


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> And exponentially more are spoken and not recorded in writing.



And they're all 100% historically correct without ANY embellishment.


----------



## ambush80

Israel said:


> What instruction of Jesus Christ or exhortation to obedience to Him by the writers of the New Testament do any find _jail-worthy_?
> 
> Or so "off the wall" as need, in their opinion...tempering?
> What do you see, if in your knowing, it has been made known to you...Jesus Christ is indeed a dangerous man. To what, to whom?



Jesus followed the Law.  You want to be like Jesus. Go burn some witches.

No?  Me neither.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> Jesus followed the Law.  You want to be like Jesus. Go burn some witches.
> 
> No?  Me neither.


Jesus did not follow the law to the letter, that is one of the reasons the Pharisee's were so ill with him.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> I understand what you are asking, and it's a very legitimate question.
> One of us (me or SFD) is wrong about the method of the belief, as in whether it's passive or active. I concede that. But at the end of the day, whether we understand how we believed accurately or not, it doesn't negate the fact that we both believe it. See one is of the mind, and one is of the Spirit. The one that's of the Spirit is the essential one.





> One of us (me or SFD) is wrong


Or maybe both.
Everybody on this forum may be wrong.


> But at the end of the day, whether we understand how we believed accurately or not, it doesn't negate the fact that we both believe it


I agree. Its a fact you both believe Jesus is the Son of God.
But you are  and  and  and using it as though it negates the huge implications -


> Originally Posted by welderguy
> I see what you are saying, but here's why it is ultimately harmless





> yip.


If you are trying to show solidarity in front of us (A/As), we see through it.
Maybe you focus on being "brothers" to avoid the huge implications in your different beliefs.
Maybe you secretly think the other is full of carp.
I don't know, but the "Yeah but we both believe Jesus is the Son of God" thing doesn't hold a lot of weight......


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Jesus did not follow the law to the letter, that is one of the reasons the Pharisee's were so ill with him.



“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (NIV, Matthew 5:17–18)"

So, I've read what some people think this means and many people say many different things.  Then it occurred to me that I'm not supposed to rely on man's understanding.  I guess It can't be understood.  

P.S. do you like the red letters?


----------



## ambush80

WaltL1 said:


> Or maybe both.
> Everybody on this forum may be wrong.
> 
> I agree. Its a fact you both believe Jesus is the Son of God.
> But you are  and  and  and using it as though it negates the huge implications -
> 
> 
> If you are trying to show solidarity in front of us (A/As), we see through it.
> Maybe you focus on being "brothers" to avoid the huge implications in your different beliefs.
> Maybe you secretly think the other is full of carp.
> I don't know, but the "Yeah but we both believe Jesus is the Son of God" thing doesn't hold a lot of weight......



It's just tribalism. They both think the Braves are the best team ever.  They disagree on who was their best pitcher, Glavine or Smolts.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (NIV, Matthew 5:17–18)"
> 
> So, I've read what some people think this means and many people say many different things.  Then it occurred to me that I'm not supposed to rely on man's understanding.  I guess It can't be understood.
> 
> P.S. do you like the red letters?


Nothing in that statement implies that Jesus "followed" the law, regardless of what color you put them in. 

It does however state what he did with / for the law by his eventual sacrifice / crucifixion. 

The greek word used in scripture that was translated to "fulfill" in the KJV that most mis-interpret is transliterated to Pleroo (plhrovw) and means; 





> to render full, i.e. to complete
> to fill to the top: so that nothing shall be wanting to full measure, fill to the brim
> to consummate: a number
> to make complete in every particular, to render perfect
> to carry through to the end, to accomplish, carry out



Some contest this meaning by other less quantifiable definitions, but if one looks at the root word for Pleroo, which is Pleres (plhvrhß) then its intent becomes more clear; 



> full, i.e. filled up (as opposed to empty)
> of hollow vessels
> of a surface, covered in every part
> of the soul, thoroughly permeated with
> full, i.e. complete
> lacking nothing, perfect



It is sad that many Christians who want to take one of the many interpretations of the Bible as fact don't bother to go back to the root writings to learn exact meanings for the teachings. Many of them choose to instead judge other Christians for making up their own interpretations. 

Something about a plank and a splinter comes to mind here. Not to mention the many verses in both the OT and NT about judgement. 

You can find the original context of these writings in the Interlinear Bible transliterations from Greek and Hebrew by merely typing in the scripture that may be taken out of context for a little more clarity. 

http://www.biblestudytools.com/interlinear-bible/passage/?q=matthew+5&t=kjv

I learned a long time ago not to rely on one mans interpretation of the original text, especially when he was applying a judgement of others to it.


----------



## Israel

ambush80 said:


> Jesus followed the Law.  You want to be like Jesus. Go burn some witches.
> 
> No?  Me neither.



When they heard this, they began to go away one by one, beginning with the older ones, until only Jesus was left, with the woman standing there. Then Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are your accusers? Has no one condemned you?”  “No one, Lord.” she answered. “Neither do I condemn you.” Jesus declared. “Now go and sin no more.”…


If you're looking for a way to condemn, (or revile, mock, scorn)...your time is always ready, always just...there...to do. It's always handy...there's always someone 'darker', dumber, more hypocritical, unkind superstitious, or proud...(pick from the panoply of error)...and it may well be...you're entirely right...that one is "not as intelligent" or honest, or brave, or noble, or whatever metric you choose to judge. Yep...a man can be all right...and still be all wrong. He'll see what he's made of when that judgment swings round his way.

Me? I'm content with what Jesus shows...in that judgment.


----------



## bullethead

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Without writings any historical knowledge is all a myth.



Sometimes, yes.
Archeology sometimes makes up for what is not written.


----------



## bullethead

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Without writings any historical knowledge is all a myth.



Welder and SFD talk about having no need for writings as god touches an individuals heart or has chosen who will believe long before they are even born.

How would either of them know about Jesus if not for the writings and especially where they were born?

Why doesn't people in other cultures just automatically "know" Jesus?


----------



## ambush80

Israel said:


> When they heard this, they began to go away one by one, beginning with the older ones, until only Jesus was left, with the woman standing there. Then Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are your accusers? Has no one condemned you?”  “No one, Lord.” she answered. “Neither do I condemn you.” Jesus declared. “Now go and sin no more.”…
> 
> 
> If you're looking for a way to condemn, (or revile, mock, scorn)...your time is always ready, always just...there...to do. It's always handy...there's always someone 'darker', dumber, more hypocritical, unkind superstitious, or proud...(pick from the panoply of error)...and it may well be...you're entirely right...that one is "not as intelligent" or honest, or brave, or noble, or whatever metric you choose to judge. Yep...a man can be all right...and still be all wrong. He'll see what he's made of when that judgment swings round his way.
> 
> Me? I'm content with what Jesus shows...in that judgment.



I'm only interested in what belief in "judgement" does to people here and now.  Like I said before, most people apply the lie in such a way that it makes them more tolerable members of society, but not always.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

bullethead said:


> Welder and SFD talk about having no need for writings as god touches an individuals heart or has chosen who will believe long before they are even born.
> 
> How would either of them know about Jesus if not for the writings and especially where they were born?
> 
> Why doesn't people in other cultures just automatically "know" Jesus?



Who has stated they would "know about Jesus"? by what God had put in their hearts? 

http://forum.gon.com/showpost.php?p=10775817&postcount=79


----------



## NCHillbilly

bullethead said:


> Welder and SFD talk about having no need for writings as god touches an individuals heart or has chosen who will believe long before they are even born.
> 
> How would either of them know about Jesus if not for the writings and especially where they were born?
> 
> Why doesn't people in other cultures just automatically "know" Jesus?



Because they automatically know Buddha or Vishnu or Allah or Gorg, the Volcano God. And believe in those just as fervently.


----------



## Artfuldodger

I think SFD believes in knowing from hearing and Welder believes in knowing from a direct call from God.

Therefore in one belief only the folks other Christians have witnessed to know and the other way God himself beat us there.


----------



## ambush80

NCHillbilly said:


> Because they automatically know Buddha or Vishnu or Allah or Gorg, the Volcano God. And believe in those just as fervently.



God has put himself in their hearts.

I actually believe this in a sense.  All peoples have come up with an idea of God.  It seems to be important.


----------



## ambush80

Artfuldodger said:


> I think SFD believes in knowing from hearing and Welder believes in knowing from a direct call from God.
> 
> Therefore in one belief only the folks other Christians have witnessed to know and the other way God himself beat us there.




An omniscient being doesn't "beat anybody there".


----------



## Israel

ambush80 said:


> I'm only interested in what belief in "judgement" does to people here and now.  Like I said before, most people apply the lie in such a way that it makes them more tolerable members of society, but not always.



Yeah. That woman was very glad in her "here and now" for Jesus judgment. Me too, in mine.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

Israel said:


> Yeah. That woman was very glad in her "here and now" for Jesus judgment. Me too, in mine.



And it should be noted that his "judgement" was against the OT law and those that were carrying it out.


----------



## ambush80

Israel said:


> Yeah. That woman was very glad in her "here and now" for Jesus judgment. Me too, in mine.



I'm glad you consider yourself "judged" if you wouldn't behave well otherwise.


----------



## WaltL1

bullethead said:


> Welder and SFD talk about having no need for writings as god touches an individuals heart or has chosen who will believe long before they are even born.
> 
> How would either of them know about Jesus if not for the writings and especially where they were born?
> 
> Why doesn't people in other cultures just automatically "know" Jesus?


According to Welder they are able to, God just hasn't pressed the ON button yet -


> This is why unborn babies, secluded islanders, mentally handicapped, deaf, blind, etc, etc, are still very able to "know" Jesus.


----------



## WaltL1

ambush80 said:


> I'm only interested in what belief in "judgement" does to people here and now.  Like I said before, most people apply the lie in such a way that it makes them more tolerable members of society, but not always.


Yes, now that society has taken the bullets out of their guns they make pretty darn good neighbors


----------



## ambush80

WaltL1 said:


> Yes, now that society has taken the bullets out of their guns they make pretty darn good neighbors



There's always room for improvement but for the most part I haven't much except for philosophical disagreement with them.  I really don't care that my new neighbor thinks the Earth is 6,000 years old.  He and his wife have accepted the secular atmosphere of the neighborhood they've moved into and have adapted well.   They haven't called the cops on us....yet.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

WaltL1 said:


> You believe Jesus is the Son of God.
> "He" believes Jesus is the Son of God.
> You believe you were pre-chosen to believe that.
> "He" believes ANYBODY can come to believe that.
> Despite the fact you both believe Jesus is the Son of God, there are HUGE implications in the differences in your beliefs.
> So for the 3rd time I ask -
> You both believe Jesus is the Son of God. So what?
> Does that erase the huge implications in the differences of your beliefs?



Yes as far a me and welder being saved goes and that's the most important part for us individually.  However the difference has vast implications.  Just 1 example:  Because I believe in free will and the potential for anyone and everyone to be saved, it's imperative to me to spread the gospel.  However many who believe in predestination say what's the point?  God is gonna save who he has already decided on and the others will perish so why do I need to bother telling anyone.  That difference doesn't affect our salvation, but it dang well ma affect yours.  Hope this helps.


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> Yes as far a me and welder being saved goes and that's the most important part for us individually.  However the difference has vast implications.  Just 1 example:  Because I believe in free will and the potential for anyone and everyone to be saved, it's imperative to me to spread the gospel.  However many who believe in predestination say what's the point?  God is gonna save who he has already decided on and the others will perish so why do I need to bother telling anyone.  That difference doesn't affect our salvation, but it dang well ma affect yours.  Hope this helps.



Those who believe in predestination spread the word because they are instructed to, even to Vessels of Wrath.  Besides, they can't help it. (That one's for you Gem, if you're out there).

Actually, they might say that you or a pastor believe that you and they have the ability to influence people to Christ by word or deed, like His PR agent.  Sounds heretical to me.


----------



## Israel

ambush80 said:


> Those who believe in predestination spread the word because they are instructed to, even to Vessels of Wrath.  Besides, they can't help it. (That one's for you Gem, if you're out there).
> 
> Actually, they might say that you or a pastor believe that you and they have the ability to influence people to Christ by word or deed, like His PR agent.  Sounds heretical to me.



What a man can be argued into...he most assuredly can be argued out of.


----------



## ambush80

Israel said:


> What a man can be argued into...he most assuredly can be argued out of.



Irrational people can't be reasoned with.


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> Yes as far a me and welder being saved goes and that's the most important part for us individually.  However the difference has vast implications.  Just 1 example:  Because I believe in free will and the potential for anyone and everyone to be saved, it's imperative to me to spread the gospel.  However many who believe in predestination say what's the point?  God is gonna save who he has already decided on and the others will perish so why do I need to bother telling anyone.  That difference doesn't affect our salvation, but it dang well ma affect yours.  Hope this helps.



I believe that for the most part you are sincere in your wanting everyone to know and come to Christ. That is not really a problem for me because in a way, I do too. BUT, here's a problem that I have noticed, that you may not see in yourself. Whenever you meet with resistance to your spreading of the gospel, you seem to get indignant toward the person to the point of eventually condemning them. You try to press them into your mold, and when they won't conform, you seem to take it personal.

To me, that is a pretense of love, under the guise of sincerity, when in the end is revealed as hypocrisy.

Another biggy for me is that when you take it upon yourself to carry the burden of other men's salvation, you are robbing God of His glory. Salvation is of the Lord, not man. He is the author and finisher of our faith, not man. No man cometh to Him unless the Father draw him..,not man.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> I believe that for the most part you are sincere in your wanting everyone to know and come to Christ. That is not really a problem for me because in a way, I do too.




Sorry.  I can't relate to that.  Again, what I don't get is if you believe you can have NO bearing on another coming to Christ why bother coming down here and talking about Him.  Why bother telling ANYBODY, ANYWHERE, ANYTHING about him?  He's gonna save who he wants and burn the rest and there's nothing you can do about it one way or the other.  It's all him.  Which brings up another problem I have with determinism.....it makes God a sadistic author of evil just as these guys say.

As far as robbing God of his glory, it's sharing in his Glory.  Never heard a believer anywhere attribute his salvation to another person, but it's a wonderful experience for me every time I see someone saved whether I was a small part of it or not.  Isn't the whole purpose of mankind to share in Gods glory and to be an object of his affection reflecting the effects of his glory back to him.  Isn't that in essence exactly what evangelism is.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> I believe that for the most part you are sincere in your wanting everyone to know and come to Christ. That is not really a problem for me because in a way, I do too. BUT, here's a problem that I have noticed, that you may not see in yourself. Whenever you meet with resistance to your spreading of the gospel, you seem to get indignant toward the person to the point of eventually condemning them. You try to press them into your mold, and when they won't conform, you seem to take it personal.
> 
> To me, that is a pretense of love, under the guise of sincerity, when in the end is revealed as hypocrisy.
> 
> Another biggy for me is that when you take it upon yourself to carry the burden of other men's salvation, you are robbing God of His glory. Salvation is of the Lord, not man. He is the author and finisher of our faith, not man. No man cometh to Him unless the Father draw him..,not man.


Just a couple comments because you made some interesting observations -


> that is a pretense of love, under the guise of sincerity, when in the end is revealed as hypocrisy.


This is how I/we view much of the "story".


> No man cometh to Him unless the Father draw him..,not man


Yet millions have been spent, cultures altered, other cultures religious beliefs wiped out, generations indoctrinated from childhood, people murdered..........
Not just by men. By Christian men. With the Church's approval, with the Church's direction........
Under the guise of bringing men to Him.......


> revealed as hypocrisy.


Indeed.


----------



## WaltL1

SemperFiDawg said:


> Sorry.  I can't relate to that.  Again, what I don't get is if you believe you can have NO bearing on another coming to Christ why bother coming down here and talking about Him.  Why bother telling ANYBODY, ANYWHERE, ANYTHING about him?  He's gonna save who he wants and burn the rest and there's nothing you can do about it one way or the other.  It's all him.  Which brings up another problem I have with determinism.....it makes God a sadistic author of evil just as these guys say.
> 
> As far as robbing God of his glory, it's sharing in his Glory.  Never heard a believer anywhere attribute his salvation to another person, but it's a wonderful experience for me every time I see someone saved whether I was a small part of it or not.  Isn't the whole purpose of mankind to share in Gods glory and to be an object of his affection reflecting the effects of his glory back to him.  Isn't that in essence exactly what evangelism is.





> Which brings up another problem I have with determinism.....it makes God a sadistic author of evil just as these guys say.


Its not just determinism.
Right off the bat you have a God who drowned unborn babies, innocent children, women, men because they didn't act right. And supposedly he knew they weren't going to act right before he created them. And, as God, he certainly could have dealt with that situation in a number of ways. But he chose a little swim for his beloved children........
Plenty of "sadistic author of evil" stuff to go around.


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> Sorry.  I can't relate to that.  Again, what I don't get is if you believe you can have NO bearing on another coming to Christ why bother coming down here and talking about Him.  Why bother telling ANYBODY, ANYWHERE, ANYTHING about him?  He's gonna save who he wants and burn the rest and there's nothing you can do about it one way or the other.  It's all him.  Which brings up another problem I have with determinism.....it makes God a sadistic author of evil just as these guys say.
> 
> As far as robbing God of his glory, it's sharing in his Glory.  Never heard a believer anywhere attribute his salvation to another person, but it's a wonderful experience for me every time I see someone saved whether I was a small part of it or not.  Isn't the whole purpose of mankind to share in Gods glory and to be an object of his affection reflecting the effects of his glory back to him.  Isn't that in essence exactly what evangelism is.



I defend the position that Welder takes because it is logically consistent.  An omniscient God only allows for predestination. That means that all the suffering, Earthy and eternal is part of God's plan; true sovereignty. All things to his glory: disfigured children, rape, cannibalism, starvation, torture, ISIS, Satan, He11.  If I were to be a Christian, this would be the only way that I can accept that these things exist.  Trust and obey.

Thankfully, I am not a Christian and the fact that these things exist is perfectly understandable to me (with the exception of He11).


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

SemperFiDawg said:


> Sorry.  I can't relate to that.  Again, what I don't get is if you believe you can have NO bearing on another coming to Christ why bother coming down here and talking about Him.  Why bother telling ANYBODY, ANYWHERE, ANYTHING about him?



When I plant a seed in the garden, I can water it all I want. 

Only God can make it germinate and grow.


----------



## ambush80

WaltL1 said:


> Its not just determinism.
> Right off the bat you have a God who drowned unborn babies, innocent children, women, men because they didn't act right. And supposedly he knew they weren't going to act right before he created them. And, as God, he certainly could have dealt with that situation in a number of ways. But he chose a little swim for his beloved children........
> Plenty of "sadistic author of evil" stuff to go around.



Although you and I wouldn't act that way or do the things the Christian God does, I can accept the rationalization that God has a plan for all the rape, murder, and suffering that we can't fathom.  It's the only way to be able keep worshiping such a being.

"He only hits me when he's drunk".


----------



## ambush80

Honestly believers, if you were in charge would you do things the way that God does?


----------



## SemperFiDawg

Miguel Cervantes said:


> When I plant a seed in the garden, I can water it all I want.
> 
> Only God can make it germinate and grow.



Yes, but are we not commissioned with planting?


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> When I plant a seed in the garden, I can water it all I want.
> 
> Only God can make it germinate and grow.



That's hardly compelling.  Let's see a seed grow into a rabbit.


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> Yes, but are we not commissioned with planting?



You are to cast your seed far and wide.  Some of it will fall on rocky soil, as it was intended from the beginning of time.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

SemperFiDawg said:


> Yes, but are we not commissioned with planting?



Yes, and an over worked field will do nothing but erode before the seed can germinate. 

The Commission without proper application of the Great Commandment is nothing more than failed attempts at beating someone into submission. It rarely if ever succeeds and turns more away from God than towards him.


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Yes, and an over worked field will do nothing but erode before the seed can germinate.
> 
> The Commission without proper application of the Great Commandment is nothing more than failed attempts at beating someone into submission. It rarely if ever succeeds and turns more away from God than towards him.



The best testimony or argument for the utility of Christianity I've ever seen is how Christians behave towards others.  It doesn't always manifest and I've seen similar results from secular, rational pursuit.  But being saved isn't about utility.  It's about


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> The best testimony or argument for the utility of Christianity I've ever seen is how Christians behave towards others.  It doesn't always manifest and I've seen similar results from secular, rational pursuit.  But utility isn't what being saved is about.  It's about



In your opinion.


----------



## ambush80

Would you believe in Christ if he said that believing in Him will cause you to go to He11?  What if he said that going to He11 was the greatest way to serve Him?


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> In your opinion.



It's the message that I've taken away from reading the poorly written, confusing book.  It may have something to do with the fact that I'm taking the words as they were written and lack the discernment to interpret them correctly, but what else can I do?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> Would you believe in Christ if he said that believing in Him will cause you to go to He11?  What if he said that going to He11 was the greatest way to serve Him?



So now we are morphing from debate to hyperbole?

Would you jump off of a cliff if you were told you would gain eternal life by doing so?


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> So now we are morphing from debate to hyperbole?
> 
> Would you jump off of a cliff if you were told you would gain eternal life by doing so?



I think that Heaven and He11 are hyperbole, don't you?  

I suppose if I believed the source I might.  Or I might put on some Nikes, eat a bunch of barbiturates, drink a bunch of vodka and cover myself with a purple sheet.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> I think that Heaven and He11 are hyperbole, don't you?


No.



ambush80 said:


> I suppose if I believed the source I might.  Or I might put on some Nikes, eat a bunch of barbiturates, drink a bunch of vodka and cover myself with a purple sheet.


Why Nikes, Why barbiturates, Why Vodka and why a Purple sheet?


----------



## ambush80

ambush80 said:


> I think that Heaven and He11 are hyperbole, don't you?
> 
> I suppose if I believed the source I might.  Or I might put on some Nikes, eat a bunch of barbiturates, drink a bunch of vodka and cover myself with a purple sheet.



It would be very difficult to get someone who held rationality and skepticism in high regard to do something like that.  Conversely, it would be easier to convince someone of demons if they already believed in ghosts.


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> No.
> 
> 
> Why Nikes, Why barbiturates, Why Vodka and why a Purple sheet?




Sorry.  Heaven's Gate reference.

Why?  Because they believed.  They believed because they were inclined.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven's_Gate_(religious_group)


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> Sorry.  Heaven's Gate reference.
> 
> Why?  Because they believed.  They believed because they were inclined.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven's_Gate_(religious_group)



It is quite humorous how you group any religion in with the others, whether it is a cult or not. 

I suppose I should start lumping my good level headed atheist friends in with the psychotic control freak ones that I know. 

See how that works?


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> It is quite humorous how you group any religion in with the others, whether it is a cult or not.
> 
> I suppose I should start lumping my good level headed atheist friends in with the psychotic control freak ones that I know.
> 
> See how that works?



That's not what I'm doing at all.  But I am making a point about the nature of belief in the supernatural.  Would you agree that someone who believes in ghosts is more likely to believe in demons?  Or that someone who believes in God  might be more easily led to believe in a specific God?  That's what I was getting at.  

Atheists come in all shapes and sizes.  We don't have a book or any dogma. The only thing we have in common is a disbelief in God.  That doesn't mean that we will all be rational. Though most atheists hold rationality in high regard  in a similar way that believers hold faith in high regard.  They're guiding principles that shape belief.  An atheist might still believe in Peter Pan.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> That's not what I'm doing at all.



This is the common ground I've observed between all people, regardless of their faith, lack there of or beliefs. 

What they perceive they are doing, and what they are actually doing typically are worlds apart.


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> This is the common ground I've observed between all people, regardless of their faith, lack there of or beliefs.
> 
> What they perceive they are doing, and what they are actually doing typically are worlds apart.



Fair enough.  All I can tell you is what I believed my intent was.

Do you always interpret people's intentions better than they do?


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> This is the common ground I've observed between all people, regardless of their faith, lack there of or beliefs.
> 
> What they perceive they are doing, and what they are actually doing typically are worlds apart.



What about the rest of what I said?


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> Sorry.  I can't relate to that.  Again, what I don't get is if you believe you can have NO bearing on another coming to Christ why bother coming down here and talking about Him.  Why bother telling ANYBODY, ANYWHERE, ANYTHING about him?  He's gonna save who he wants and burn the rest and there's nothing you can do about it one way or the other.  It's all him.  Which brings up another problem I have with determinism.....it makes God a sadistic author of evil just as these guys say.
> 
> As far as robbing God of his glory, it's sharing in his Glory.  Never heard a believer anywhere attribute his salvation to another person, but it's a wonderful experience for me every time I see someone saved whether I was a small part of it or not.  Isn't the whole purpose of mankind to share in Gods glory and to be an object of his affection reflecting the effects of his glory back to him.  Isn't that in essence exactly what evangelism is.



I'm not saying God can't or won't use me in some way or another in His Kingdom. Just because I don't believe I can get someone saved doesn't mean there's not a purpose for me in His Kingdom. If I never did anything other than tell what good things Jesus has done for me, it would not be a waste of time.(remember the wild Gadarean?)
But, see, even though not everyone is a potential follower, we simply don't know who is and who isn't. They don't have a big E stamped on their foreheads. I bet everyone who knew the thief on the cross had him pegged for he11. But not so.
And besides, it doesn't matter anyway, because we are told to love even our enemies and pray for them.(coals of fire on their heads)


----------



## ambush80

welderguy said:


> I'm not saying God can't or won't use me in some way or another in His Kingdom. Just because I don't believe I can get someone saved doesn't mean there's not a purpose for me in His Kingdom. If I never did anything other than tell what good things Jesus has done for me, it would not be a waste of time.(remember the wild Gadarean?)
> But, see, even though not everyone is a potential follower, we simply don't know who is and who isn't. They don't have a big E stamped on their foreheads. I bet everyone who knew the thief on the cross had him pegged for he11. But not so.
> And besides, it doesn't matter anyway, because we are told to love even our enemies and pray for them.(coals of fire on their heads)



Welder,
Do you think I understand your position well?  Does it seem like I understand why you believe in predestination?


----------



## welderguy

ambush80 said:


> Welder,
> Do you think I understand your position well?  Does it seem like I understand why you believe in predestination?



Based on what you said in post #171, yes, that's it in a nutshell.
But, based on other things you've said in the past, I'm not totally convinced.


----------



## ambush80

welderguy said:


> Based on what you said in post #171, yes, that's it in a nutshell.
> But, based on other things you've said in the past, I'm not totally convinced.



Sure.  But I get the predestination thing crystal clear because it's a logical argument.  I also very clearly understand that when you start with the premise that everything that God does is 'good' and 'loving', you have a different definition of those words in regards to what God does.  

What I'm curious about is, is it more righteous to think about the relationship between predestination and omniscience logically or would you be better served trying to hear what God says about it to you personally through prayer or discernment like SemperFi does?


----------



## welderguy

ambush80 said:


> Sure.  But I get the predestination thing crystal clear because it's a logical argument.  I also very clearly understand that when you start with the premise that everything that God does is 'good' and 'loving', you have a different definition of those words in regards to what God does.
> 
> What I'm curious about is, is it more righteous to think about the relationship between predestination and omniscience logically or would you be better served trying to hear what God says about it to you personally through prayer or discernment like SemperFi does?



I don't think I'm picking up what you are putting down. 

But I do seek guidance through prayer for discernment, BTW.(not sure how this relates to what you're asking though)


----------



## ambush80

welderguy said:


> I don't think I'm picking up what you are putting down.
> 
> But I do seek guidance through prayer for discernment, BTW.(not sure how this relates to what you're asking though)



I'll try again.

If you prayed and discerned something but it contradicted something that you came to believe through rational inquiry, which method would you place more emphasis on to form your belief?

If God told you in a dream, or in the voice that you guys hear in your heads, that SemperFi is right, would you abandon your rationally derived position on predestination?


----------



## welderguy

ambush80 said:


> I'll try again.
> 
> If you prayed and discerned something but it contradicted something that you came to believe through rational inquiry, which method would you place more emphasis on to form your belief?
> 
> If God told you in a dream, or in the voice that you guys hear in your heads, that SemperFi is right, would you abandon your rationally derived position on predestination?



I think you may have a false idea about dreams and voices and rational inquiry. Or maybe not false, but different from mine. not sure.I don't put much stock in my dreams though.

But, I can tell you this, I rely heavily on the scriptures, through prayer, for the wisdom I need in life. This also depends heavily on how closely I'm walking by the Spirit.(I know you will probably have questions about that but can't elaborate right now)


----------



## ambush80

welderguy said:


> I think you may have a false idea about dreams and voices and rational inquiry. Or maybe not false, but different from mine. not sure.I don't put much stock in my dreams though.



Fine. never mind dreams.  How does God talk to you?  In a voice?  Just a thought in your head?   Whose voice is the thought in?  

By the way, when you read something, whose voice do you hear?  I hear mine mostly.  Sometimes if I read a book by an author whose voice I know, like Sam Harris, I hear his voice.  When you read the Bible, whose voice do you hear it in?  Yours?



welderguy said:


> But, I can tell you this, I rely heavily on the scriptures, through prayer, for the wisdom I need in life. This also depends heavily on how closely I'm walking by the Spirit.(I know you will probably have questions about that but can't elaborate right now)



What does it feel like when you're walking with the spirit?


----------



## Terminal Idiot

welderguy said:


> But, I can tell you this, I rely heavily on the scriptures, through prayer, for the wisdom I need in life. This also depends heavily on how closely I'm walking by the Spirit.(I know you will probably have questions about that but can't elaborate right now)



Given that you and SFD have disagreements on your religion - why wouldn't god guide you guys in the right direction as to who is correctly interpreting the Bible? When you pray and receive wisdom, why wouldn't that wisdom include the proper understanding of the text you rely on to guide your life and properly serve your lord and savior?


----------



## Artfuldodger

Terminal Idiot said:


> Given that you and SFD have disagreements on your religion - why wouldn't god guide you guys in the right direction as to who is correctly interpreting the Bible? When you pray and receive wisdom, why wouldn't that wisdom include the proper understanding of the text you rely on to guide your life and properly serve your lord and savior?



Maybe God gives different paths to belief by offering the various denominations. That way one can pick a path they are comfortable with and in this way more believers are formed. It allows more people a chance at salvation.

Oneness, Trinitarian, freewill, election, works based, and/or grace only salvation.


----------



## red neck richie

ambush80 said:


> Fine. never mind dreams.  How does God talk to you?  In a voice?  Just a thought in your head?   Whose voice is the thought in?
> 
> By the way, when you read something, whose voice do you hear?  I hear mine mostly.  Sometimes if I read a book by an author whose voice I know, like Sam Harris, I hear his voice.  When you read the Bible, whose voice do you hear it in?  Yours?
> 
> 
> 
> What does it feel like when you're walking with the spirit?



Ambush I wont speak for my brother Welder but I will tell you how it feels for me when I feel the presence of the holy spirit. First I get the chills from head to toe no matter the temperature in the room. Then I get this overwhelming feeling of love that is coming from his presence. My mind is clear and at peace. I often have clarity to things that I am thinking about. He brings me to tears that such a love could exist. And I am often brought to tears of joy knowing that I am a sinner and he loves me anyway. But I'm sure others experiences may be different. As everyone is different. There are no two souls that are the same.


----------



## Artfuldodger

ambush80 said:


> Sure.  But I get the predestination thing crystal clear because it's a logical argument.  I also very clearly understand that when you start with the premise that everything that God does is 'good' and 'loving', you have a different definition of those words in regards to what God does.
> 
> What I'm curious about is, is it more righteous to think about the relationship between predestination and omniscience logically or would you be better served trying to hear what God says about it to you personally through prayer or discernment like SemperFi does?



The predestination/election argument is more logical considering God is omni-everything.

This makes it hard for the freewill believers to see and justify God such as creating a man capable of sin and knowing full well that he would sin. The Word, plan, Jesus was with God in the beginning. Then we have the freewill problem of man getting the Word to the world which we have failed to do. The predestination plan has God calling all as individuals even on small islands and in Hindu nations. 
Predestination takes man out of the salvation equation. That way God can save and elect whom he has already. It's really the better way of reaching everyone than depending on man.


----------



## ambush80

red neck richie said:


> Ambush I wont speak for my brother Welder but I will tell you how it feels for me when I feel the presence of the holy spirit. First I get the chills from head to toe no matter the temperature in the room. Then I get this overwhelming feeling of love that is coming from his presence. My mind is clear and at peace. I often have clarity to things that I am thinking about. He brings me to tears that such a love could exist. And I am often brought to tears of joy knowing that I am a sinner and he loves me anyway. But I'm sure others experiences may be different. As everyone is different. There are no two souls that are the same.



Would you believe someone else if they said the same thing about the presence of Allah coming over them?  Failed suicide jihadists claim to have felt the embrace of God and a feeling of peace like they had never known come over them the moment they thought they were about to commit suicide. Is it possible that the feelings you have happen just the same to all other kinds of people for all other kinds of reasons?  How about people who feel those things on drugs?

I know you can only speak for yourself but do you think it's at least possible that other people can feel that way for different reasons?


----------



## ambush80

Artfuldodger said:


> The predestination/election argument is more logical considering God is omni-everything.
> 
> This makes it hard for the freewill believers to see and justify God such as creating a man capable of sin and knowing full well that he would sin. The Word, plan, Jesus was with God in the beginning. Then we have the freewill problem of man getting the Word to the world which we have failed to do. The predestination plan has God calling all as individuals even on small islands and in Hindu nations.
> Predestination takes man out of the salvation equation. That way God can save and elect whom he has already. It's really the better way of reaching everyone than depending on man.



You use language in a confused way.

"Jesus was with God in the beginning"  There is no "beginning" to an eternal being.

'Then we have the freewill problem of man getting the Word to the world which we have failed to do." I didn't fail, you didn't fail to do anything.  It was predestined.  The plan succeeded.  It was never going to fail.

"That way God can save and elect whom he has already."  He can't save anyone.  There is no tense to an infinite being.  

I'm not sure you've absorbed the concept completely.


----------



## red neck richie

ambush80 said:


> Would you believe someone else if they said the same thing about the presence of Allah coming over them?  Failed suicide jihadists claim to have felt the embrace of God and a feeling of peace like they had never known come over them the moment they thought they were about to commit suicide. Is it possible that the feelings you have happen just the same to all other kinds of people for all other kinds of reasons?  How about people who feel those things on drugs?
> 
> I know you can only speak for yourself but do you think it's at least possible that other people can feel that way for different reasons?



If It came from love maybe. Look I'm not about to tell you I have it all figured out. I can just share my experiences with you.


----------



## ambush80

red neck richie said:


> If It came from love maybe. Look I'm not about to tell you I have it all figured out. I can just share my experiences with you.



I appreciate your input, Richie.  I think you represent many believers.


----------



## Terminal Idiot

ambush80 said:


> Would you believe someone else if they said the same thing about the presence of Allah coming over them?  Failed suicide jihadists claim to have felt the embrace of God and a feeling of peace like they had never known come over them the moment they thought they were about to commit suicide. Is it possible that the feelings you have happen just the same to all other kinds of people for all other kinds of reason



According to Artful, this is a highly plausible theory - giving many outlets for religious belief - all leading to the same God.


----------



## welderguy

Terminal Idiot said:


> Given that you and SFD have disagreements on your religion - why wouldn't god guide you guys in the right direction as to who is correctly interpreting the Bible? When you pray and receive wisdom, why wouldn't that wisdom include the proper understanding of the text you rely on to guide your life and properly serve your lord and savior?



How do you know that is not exactly what He's doing?
Like I said earlier, iron sharpens iron. You may be sharpening my iron right now. Or vice versa.


----------



## welderguy

ambush80 said:


> Fine. never mind dreams.  How does God talk to you?  In a voice?  Just a thought in your head?   Whose voice is the thought in?
> 
> By the way, when you read something, whose voice do you hear?  I hear mine mostly.  Sometimes if I read a book by an author whose voice I know, like Sam Harris, I hear his voice.  When you read the Bible, whose voice do you hear it in?  Yours?
> 
> 
> 
> What does it feel like when you're walking with the spirit?



Only voices I've ever heard in my head were my own, that I know of.
When I'm walking in the Spirit, it is more like a very strong influence, in a good way mind you.(no crazy impulses to kill people or do evil, just the opposite.)


----------



## Terminal Idiot

welderguy said:


> How do you know that is not exactly what He's doing?
> Like I said earlier, iron sharpens iron. You may be sharpening my iron right now. Or vice versa.



Because you have different takes on the same subject, which is what lead to my question in the first place.


----------



## welderguy

Terminal Idiot said:


> Because you have different takes on the same subject, which is what lead to my question in the first place.



Exactly. That part is obvious. My question to you is how do you know God is not using him or me to help the other out of the ditch. It's obvious we both cannot be right on this particular subject. One of us is in the ditch. My belief is that through prayer and much labor, these things will be resolved in due time.


----------



## 1gr8bldr

NCHillbilly said:


> I have never claimed to be holy, nor ever had any illusions of being so. I am nowhere near holy. I'm very imperfect, but generally a good-enough guy, like the majority of folks. I still don't see why a loving god would decree that I should have to burn in horrible torment for eternity because he created me to be imperfect, then punishes me for my imperfections.


The he11 concept is not in the bible. It's been added. Good people die and are no more just as bad people are. May all unbelievers  go to their rest in peace


----------



## Terminal Idiot

welderguy said:


> Exactly. That part is obvious. My question to you is how do you know God is not using him or me to help the other out of the ditch. It's obvious we both cannot be right on this particular subject. One of us is in the ditch. My belief is that through prayer and much labor, these things will be resolved in due time.



Well, I guess I can't say I know anything for sure, but I could say that it seems that it is a poor way of teaching your children. Hundreds of generations of his "children" have lived and died disagreeing with each other on the meaning and interpretation of the Bible(s). And none of them seem to be resolved. The questions we are asking on this forum have been asked for a long time - and yet there are Mormons and Baptists and Jews and Catholics, etc. Everyone believes their own version of history. Everyone knows they are right. Yet they can't all be right. 

So, let's say you are a father of three children. And they all have a different answer to 6+4+8. When they ask for help (prayer), do you throw them all in a room to sharpen each other's iron? Or do YOU help them understand the answer. As a father of two wonderful kids, I try to guide them the best I can everyday. No riddles, no half stories, no threats of eternal d@mnation.


----------



## welderguy

Terminal Idiot said:


> Well, I guess I can't say I know anything for sure, but I could say that it seems that it is a poor way of teaching your children. Hundreds of generations of his "children" have lived and died disagreeing with each other on the meaning and interpretation of the Bible(s). And none of them seem to be resolved. The questions we are asking on this forum have been asked for a long time - and yet there are Mormons and Baptists and Jews and Catholics, etc. Everyone believes their own version of history. Everyone knows they are right. Yet they can't all be right.
> 
> So, let's say you are a father of three children. And they all have a different answer to 6+4+8. When they ask for help (prayer), do you throw them all in a room to sharpen each other's iron? Or do YOU help them understand the answer. As a father of two wonderful kids, I try to guide them the best I can everyday. No riddles, no half stories, no threats of eternal d@mnation.



I am in agreement with you. I wish every problem was as easy as 6+4+8 though. Some take denial of one's own agenda and the agenda of the world to be transformed into something better.
Some of the world's problems will not ever be resolved in this life, but they will be resolved in the next. Revelation tells me in heaven there will not be anything that makes a lie.The crooked ways will be made straight.


----------



## Israel

Terminal Idiot said:


> Well, I guess I can't say I know anything for sure, but I could say that it seems that it is a poor way of teaching your children. Hundreds of generations of his "children" have lived and died disagreeing with each other on the meaning and interpretation of the Bible(s). And none of them seem to be resolved. The questions we are asking on this forum have been asked for a long time - and yet there are Mormons and Baptists and Jews and Catholics, etc. Everyone believes their own version of history. Everyone knows they are right. Yet they can't all be right.
> 
> So, let's say you are a father of three children. And they all have a different answer to 6+4+8. When they ask for help (prayer), do you throw them all in a room to sharpen each other's iron? Or do YOU help them understand the answer. As a father of two wonderful kids, I try to guide them the best I can everyday. No riddles, no half stories, no threats of eternal d@mnation.



If that were it, if it were a matter of getting something right in our math...(but, to what?)...the gaining of an approval...the gaining of a check mark next to our work as though "now you can go on to the next level of math...we shall be doing a thing called _geometry_"? Perhaps we should then, rightly struggle in our lessons.

What if is our very "need" to feel as though we are progressing, our longing to be gaining over others...that is being addressed? What if it is really our own questions that are the most severe discipline...?

What if the question we somehow come to see plainly..."How can Daddy love us both the same...me struggling to get "the right answer" and brother there, neglecting his books for playing at the creek with frogs and snakes, and pollywogs?" Who, or what, has tasked us with being "the more right"?


Yes, the prodigal had his lessons to learn. But we see, so did the  seeming _good _"stay at home son" who, surely as much as the prodigal, needed to learn a thing. One could even see that, if not for the prodigal, the stay at home would never be brought to know what he needed to know. And that, a thing too wonderful for him to have even imagined.

What sounds like riddles, half stories, strange parables, are only so because our own hearing, and seeing, are so distorted.

The one hired at "the last hour of the day" gets all the first hired in the morning...who thought they were bearing a burden...working through the heat of noon, gets. It was never to be burden, at all. It was all to bring to the last hour and discover just how gracious is the Lord of the vineyard. Whether any of us "could have known" better at first light that this was the sole labor becomes moot...the Lord has appointed to each his call to be heard...when it is heard. But, a good lesson might be the testimony of our own sweat, are we rejoicing in it, or bitter at what is being worked out of us?


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> How do you know that is not exactly what He's doing?
> Like I said earlier, iron sharpens iron. You may be sharpening my iron right now. Or vice versa.


Yes iron sharpens iron.
But here's the thing -
Iron sharpening iron doesn't mean you have come to the truth/facts/reality.
It just means you are getting better at arguing your views and anticipating the questions and arguments the other is going to make and being prepared for them.
Its what we do here on this forum every day.
You can both be completely wrong and still sharpen each others iron.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

Israel said:


> What if is our very "need" to feel as though we are progressing, our longing to be gaining over others...that is being addressed?


Self Righteousness among Christians is the hidden sin that will slap us in the face when we are on our knees before the throne of judgment. This we should fear above all else in our struggle to understand and live out a life worthy of the New Covenant. 

How can any man claim to be a "New" man, slain in the spirit and covered by Salvation while thinking his mission as a Christian is to be the judge of others through application of an old Law that was fulfilled and no longer applicable. Nothing the Christ said or lived said or implied was directing us to ignore the Mosaic Laws of the OT, but instead He gave us a more simplistic, yet apparently most complicated Law over all others to abide in. 

LOVE - We learned it by reciting it as a child. God IS Love.



> *1 Corinthians 13:4-7*
> 
> 4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.




"but rejoices with the truth"

What is "the truth"

But what is the "truth"? Is it the Laws of the OT? Is it "My interpretation of the scriptures are more accurate than yours"?

No, it is simple. The truth IS the very paradigm that IS Jesus Christ and the way he lived his life as an example to us for how to live ours. 



> *John 14:6*
> 
> 6 Jesus answered, “*I am* the way and the *truth* and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.



Do not interpret this "truth" to mean that any man that does not know Jesus during his life on earth will not pass through the pearly gates. Remember this; 



> Romans 14:11
> 
> 10 You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister[a]? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11 It is written:
> 
> “‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,
> ‘every knee will bow before me;
> every tongue will acknowledge God.’”



Every man will have his day before our Savior and have the opportunity, before all of his grandeur, to confess or deny, setting then forever his destiny. 

I am to merely sow the seed, only God can germinate it and make it grow. It is not necessary for me to condemn or curse the seed for it not bowing to "my will" for it is not my will being the reason I sowed that seed to begin with. It was merely the direction of my Lord & Savior that I do so.

Remember, The word of God IS sharper than a double edged sword. It cuts both ways. Be careful how you use it. 



> Hebrews 4:12
> 
> 12 For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.



Who among us wants to slay a mans spirit in our quest to deliver the "truth"? Sadly, many a Christian is guilty of just this type of murder. 

Cast the hook, cast the net, sow the seed. Let God reap the harvest and do not succumb to the frustration of the human spirit because you do not see the gains of your efforts before your very eyes. He will make the harvest plentiful to His liking when His time is right. Not for Our own gratification.


----------



## WaltL1

1gr8bldr said:


> The he11 concept is not in the bible. It's been added. Good people die and are no more just as bad people are. May all unbelievers  go to their rest in peace


That's true.
But ask the vast majority of Christians who were indoctrinated by their parents/church/Christian school/ every day life....... if they know that.
So which becomes "reality" for the typical Christian -
He11 was added?
Or...
There is a Heaven and He11 (the hot place with a really nice campfire)?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

WaltL1 said:


> That's true.
> But ask the vast majority of Christians who were indoctrinated by their parents/church/Christian school/ every day life....... if they know that.
> So which becomes "reality" for the typical Christian -
> He11 was added?
> Or...
> There is a Heaven and He11 (the hot place with a really nice campfire)?



Would you know darkness if there were no light?
Would you know evil if there were no good?

Even the Yin cannot exist without the Yang.


----------



## NCHillbilly

1gr8bldr said:


> The he11 concept is not in the bible. It's been added. Good people die and are no more just as bad people are. May all unbelievers  go to their rest in peace



Really, He11 isn't in the Bible? It's chock full of it, especially the New Testament. Jesus himself mentioned the fires of He11 many times. I reckon Jesus should be an authority on the subject if anybody ever was?

If Jesus's words about He11 were "added," then what else was? How can you trust any of it then?

As a matter of fact, 90% of the sermons I've ever heard in my life, (and that's a lot of them,) were chock full o' He11 and fire and brimstone and eternal torment for unbelievers. He11 often seems to be the focal point of most Christian belief.


----------



## WaltL1

NCHillbilly said:


> Really, He11 isn't in the Bible? It's chock full of it, especially the New Testament. Jesus himself mentioned the fires of He11 many times. I reckon Jesus should be an authority on the subject if anybody ever was?
> 
> If Jesus's words about He11 were "added," then what else was? How can you trust any of it then?
> 
> As a matter of fact, 90% of the sermons I've ever heard in my life, (and that's a lot of them,) were chock full o' He11 and fire and brimstone and eternal torment for unbelievers. He11 often seems to be the focal point of most Christian belief.


Not answering for 1gr8bldr but I think "added" isn't really the proper word. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, the Heaven/He11 concept wasn't the original teachings. There were snippets that could be interpreted as such but it wasn't what was taught. The focus was on "Heaven".
The He11 concept grew in popularity as it proved to be much more successful at putting butts in seats.
That morphed into exactly what you described.
Fear is a strong motivator.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

NCHillbilly said:


> Really, He11 isn't in the Bible? It's chock full of it, especially the New Testament. Jesus himself mentioned the fires of He11 many times. I reckon Jesus should be an authority on the subject if anybody ever was?
> 
> If Jesus's words about He11 were "added," then what else was? How can you trust any of it then?
> 
> As a matter of fact, 90% of the sermons I've ever heard in my life, (and that's a lot of them,) were chock full o' He11 and fire and brimstone and eternal torment for unbelievers. He11 often seems to be the focal point of most Christian belief.



In later translations, particularly the KJV, you are correct, but not from the original transliterations. 

Tartaroo (tartarovw) is one of the words used in 2 Peter 2:4 and it's definition is as follows;



> the name of the subterranean region, doleful and dark, regarded by the ancient Greeks as the abode of the wicked dead, where they suffer punishment for their evil deeds; it answers to Gehenna of the Jews
> to thrust down to Tartarus, to hold captive in Tartarus



In either case I think the metaphoric meaning of it's use is universally accepted as a place none of us want to be.  Perhaps it seemed logical at the time of the KJV translations to parse all references down to just one word to cover it's intent?


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Exactly. That part is obvious. My question to you is how do you know God is not using him or me to help the other out of the ditch. It's obvious we both cannot be right on this particular subject. One of us is in the ditch. My belief is that through prayer and much labor, these things will be resolved in due time.


When someone believes in gods and demons why is it that in your world where anything is possible  whatever happens is a result of the "good god" and not the "bad devil"?

Has the devil deceived you both instead of god having a hand in it at all?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

WaltL1 said:


> The He11 concept grew in popularity as it proved to be much more successful at putting butts in seats.


The Babylon Bee has a great sarcastic parody on this very subject "putting butts in seats" that they recently released. It is spot on.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

bullethead said:


> When someone believes in gods and demons why is it that in your world where anything is possible  whatever happens is a result of the "good god" and not the "bad devil"?
> 
> Has the devil deceived you both instead of god having a hand in it at all?



There is a book by C.S. Lewis called "The Screwtape Letters" that addresses this very topic, and is a must read for anyone, particularly Christians.


----------



## bullethead

Miguel Cervantes said:


> There is a book by C.S. Lewis called "The Screwtape Letters" that addresses this very topic, and is a must read for anyone, particularly Christians.



Can you give us a basic rundown of what it says?

From an outside observer I notice that the overwhelming majority of believers in any god are convinced that as an individual they are doing things correctly and therefore they have the approval and full backing of their god. They often point out what other believers are not doing correctly to be able to be as close to a god as they are. And no matter if things in life are positive or negative it is a result of their gods hand in it and not the millions of evil minions that also exist in their world, but constantly are ignored and passed over.
Kind of like the style of constantly cherry picking the good verses and ignoring the bad verses that takes place so frequently.


----------



## WaltL1

Miguel Cervantes said:


> The Babylon Bee has a great sarcastic parody on this very subject "putting butts in seats" that they recently released. It is spot on.


The entertainment consoles on the pew backs? 

The He11 threat used to work.
Had to change tactics and go with entertainment


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> When someone believes in gods and demons why is it that in your world where anything is possible  whatever happens is a result of the "good god" and not the "bad devil"?
> 
> Has the devil deceived you both instead of god having a hand in it at all?



I'm sure that satan has a hand in it. He is the great deceiver you know. But he has to ask permission from God to do it.(ie. Job 1)


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> I'm sure that satan has a hand in it. He is the great deceiver you know. But he has to ask permission from God to do it.(ie. Job 1)


Of course.
So God does not deceive but does allow for a great deceiver.
I think that falls under "letting someone else do the dirty work".


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> I'm sure that satan has a hand in it. He is the great deceiver you know. But he has to ask permission from God to do it.(ie. Job 1)



So Satan went to god, to ask permission from god so that Satan could rebel?

Why ask permission if god already knows what is going to happen, if not has already planned for it to happen?

You paint yourself into a lot of corners when you try to mesh all knowing with not all knowing. Just like the writers of the bible did.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> So Satan went to god, to ask permission from god so that Satan could rebel?
> 
> Why ask permission if god already knows what is going to happen, if not has already planned for it to happen?
> 
> You paint yourself into a lot of corners when you try to mesh all knowing with not all knowing. Just like the writers of the bible did.



Everyone and everything is subject to God. He created it ALL for His purpose.
Nothing happens without God allowing it.


----------



## NCHillbilly

WaltL1 said:


> Not answering for 1gr8bldr but I think "added" isn't really the proper word. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, the Heaven/He11 concept wasn't the original teachings. There were snippets that could be interpreted as such but it wasn't what was taught. The focus was on "Heaven".
> The He11 concept grew in popularity as it proved to be much more successful at putting butts in seats.
> That morphed into exactly what you described.
> Fear is a strong motivator.



So this isn't the concept of heaven and He11, or it was added later?

_11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.

12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and CensoredCensoredCensoredCensored delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

14 And death and CensoredCensoredCensoredCensored were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire._



And Jesus didn't actually say this:

_40 “As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 

41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. 

42 They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 

43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Whoever has ears, let them hear."_



Or this?
_
22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

23 And in CensoredCensoredCensoredCensored he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime received thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented._



Or this, and much more like it?

_47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into CensoredCensoredCensoredCensored fire:

48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched._

Now I'm really confused. So, one of the main themes of the Bible and the whole Christian belief system is not real, and was "added," and Jesus didn't really say what the Bible says he said? 

How could one be a Christian and claim that the Bible is the Word of God, but not believe in punishment via He11 for non-believers?


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Everyone and everything is subject to God. He created it ALL for His purpose.
> Nothing happens without God allowing it.



Then we are all doing precisely what we have been designed to to. 
You are so lucky to be part of the chosen.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Then we are all doing precisely what we have been designed to to.
> You are so lucky to be part of the chosen.



Divine allotment has nothing to do with random luck.
But I kinda understand what you might be meaning. That  I've received something that I had nothing whatsoever to do with.

You may receive it too, when you least expect it. Keep looking for it. He's a God who delights in mercy.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Divine allotment has nothing to do with random luck.
> But I kinda understand what you might be meaning. I've received something that I had nothing whatsoever to do with.
> 
> You may receive it too, when you least expect it. Keep looking for it. He's a God who delights in mercy.


Except when he is drowning people  etc etc etc.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Except when he is drowning people  etc etc etc.



You did the same thing when you called the exterminator out to do a termite treatment.
Those poor termites. They were just doing what their nature was to do.
You were soooo unfair to them. Did they not have any special meaning to you at all?

And to beat it all, you didn't even create them. That's outrageous of you!
How dare you!


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> You did the same thing when you called the exterminator out to do a termite treatment.
> Those poor termites. They were just doing what their nature was to do.
> You were soooo unfair to them. Did they not have any special meaning to you at all?
> 
> And to beat it all, you didn't even create them. That's outrageous of you!
> How dare you!



1. I never had termites.
2. People = Bugs to you.
And you wonder why many in here cannot take you as credible.

3. Your children must be terrified that you believe that you are justified in eliminating them at your whim.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Telling someone who isn't one of the Elect to look for it might be the wrong way to phrase it. Maybe just be aware that it could be revealed unto you in the future. Regardless you wouldn't even have to do that.
If it will it will and if it won't it won't.


----------



## welderguy

Artfuldodger said:


> Telling someone who isn't one of the Elect to look for it might be the wrong way to phrase it. Maybe just be aware that it could be revealed unto you in the future. Regardless you wouldn't even have to do that.
> If it will it will and if it won't it won't.



Art, how do you know who is the elect or not?


----------



## WaltL1

NCHillbilly said:


> So this isn't the concept of heaven and He11, or it was added later?
> 
> _11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
> 
> 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
> 13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and CensoredCensoredCensoredCensored delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
> 
> 14 And death and CensoredCensoredCensoredCensored were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
> 
> 15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire._
> 
> 
> 
> And Jesus didn't actually say this:
> 
> _40 “As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age.
> 
> 41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil.
> 
> 42 They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
> 
> 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Whoever has ears, let them hear."_
> 
> 
> 
> Or this?
> _
> 22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
> 
> 23 And in CensoredCensoredCensoredCensored he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
> 
> 24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
> 
> 25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime received thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented._
> 
> 
> 
> Or this, and much more like it?
> 
> _47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into CensoredCensoredCensoredCensored fire:
> 
> 48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched._
> 
> Now I'm really confused. So, one of the main themes of the Bible and the whole Christian belief system is not real, and was "added," and Jesus didn't really say what the Bible says he said?
> 
> How could one be a Christian and claim that the Bible is the Word of God, but not believe in punishment via He11 for non-believers?


First, I'm not claiming to be a Christian history authority so take what I say with a grain of salt 
But -
Its the concept of an everlasting torture in this place called he11 that is not what is "original".
The "original" concept, it is argued, is that the original he11 was not even meant for "us". It wasn't created for "us". It wasn't "us" that were originally intended to go there. Nor was it even called he11.
Miquel touches on it here -


> the name of the subterranean region, doleful and dark, regarded by the ancient Greeks as the abode of the wicked dead, where they suffer punishment for their evil deeds; it answers to Gehenna of the Jews
> to thrust down to Tartarus, to hold captive in Tartarus


----------



## WaltL1

NCHillbilly -
In rabbinic texts Gehenna played an important role as a place where unrighteous souls were punished. The rabbis believed that anyone who did not live in accordance with the ways of God and Torah would spend time Gehenna. According to the rabbis some of the transgressions that would merit a visit to Gehenna included idolatry (Taanit 5a), incest (Erubin 19a), adultery (Sotah 4b), pride (Avodah Zarah 18b), anger and losing one's temper (Nedarim 22a).

Of course, they also believed that anyone who spoke ill of a rabbinic scholar would merit time in Gehenna (Berakhot 19a).
In order to avoid a visit to Gehenna the rabbis recommended that people occupy themselves "with good deeds" (Midrash on Proverbs 17:1). "He who has Torah, good deeds, humility and fear of heaven will be saved from punishment in Gehenna," says Pesikta Rabbati 50:1.

In this way the concept of Gehenna was used to encourage people to live good, ethical lives and to study Torah. In the case of transgression, the rabbis prescribed teshuvah (repentance) as the remedy. Indeed, the rabbis taught that a person could repent even at the very gates of Gehenna (Erubin 19a).
For the most part the rabbis did not believe souls would be condemned to eternal punishment. "The punishment of the wicked in Gehenna is twelve months," states Shabbat 33b, while other texts say the time-frame could be anywhere from three to twelve months. Yet there were transgressions that the rabbis felt did merit eternal dam nation. These included: heresy, publicly shaming someone, committing adultery with a married woman and rejecting the words of the Torah. However, because the rabbis also believed that one could repent at any time, the belief in eternal dam nation was not a predominant one.
https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-gehenna-2076760


----------



## Artfuldodger

Originally posted by Welderguy
Art, how do you know who is the elect or not? 

I don't know who the elect is. My point is, we don't have to know. It's not like we need to say "hey guys be on  the lookout for your future revelation."


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Art, how do you know who is the elect or not?



Lololol, YOU seem to know who is elect, what pleases god, how god thinks,  what god wants, gods thought process, and everything else about something that you have never seen, never talked to, never met.


----------



## 660griz

welderguy said:


> You did the same thing when you called the exterminator out to do a termite treatment.
> Those poor termites. They were just doing what their nature was to do.
> You were soooo unfair to them. Did they not have any special meaning to you at all?
> 
> And to beat it all, you didn't even create them. That's outrageous of you!
> How dare you!



Wow!

For starters, I never told the termites I love them. Nor did I claim to be a merciful human to termites. 
One last note, I didn't wipe out every termite on earth for the wrong doings of the ones around my house.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> 1. I never had termites.
> 2. People = Bugs to you.
> And you wonder why many in here cannot take you as credible.
> 
> 3. Your children must be terrified that you believe that you are justified in eliminating them at your whim.



So by this I assume you believe humans to be above bugs. Correct? I do too. So there's nothing evil about exterminating them if they infest your house right?

The infinite sovereign Creator is far above man and bugs. He is completely just in wiping them all out if He pleases, no questions asked, right?

Why is this such a hard concept?


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Lololol, YOU seem to know who is elect, what pleases god, how god thinks,  what god wants, gods thought process, and everything else about something that you have never seen, never talked to, never met.



I don't know who the elect are. That's why I asked Art.


----------



## WaltL1

660griz said:


> Wow!
> 
> For starters, I never told the termites I love them. Nor did I claim to be a merciful human to termites.
> One last note, I didn't wipe out every termite on earth for the wrong doings of the ones around my house.


And you arent making a joke about one of God's creatures killing one of God's creatures.


----------



## bullethead

660griz said:


> Wow!
> 
> For starters, I never told the termites I love them. Nor did I claim to be a merciful human to termites.
> One last note, I didn't wipe out every termite on earth for the wrong doings of the ones around my house.



I know what will work!
I'll have anonymous writers write my guide book to termites. I'll have them write hundreds and thousands of extra rules that never make the final cut and I'll have them do it over thousands of years. I will contradict myself, include historical lies, i will show fallability, but I will rely on these writers to figure it all out and hope it turns out how i want it to.
I will stick these writings in various caves around Pennsylvania to be found in horribly deteriorated conditions and i will insist that no matter which little part of a termite community finds them that the rest of the termites worldwide will be held accountable for not obeying my rules.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> I don't know who the elect are. That's why I asked Art.



Are YOU part of the elect?
And if so how do you know?
And if not how are you able to speak for a god?


----------



## 660griz

WaltL1 said:


> And you arent making a joke about one of God's creatures killing one of God's creatures.



God gave us dominion over them. God didn't know about some of them apparently.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> So by this I assume you believe humans to be above bugs. Correct? I do too. So there's nothing evil about exterminating them if they infest your house right?
> 
> The infinite sovereign Creator is far above man and bugs. He is completely just in wiping them all out if He pleases, no questions asked, right?
> 
> Why is this such a hard concept?


I did not create bugs in my image.

I do not claim to love bugs.

I do not demand that bugs worship me.

I did not purposely create some bugs that will be spared for worshipping me and purposely create other bugs that specifically will not worship me and then hold them to eternal torture for them doing EXACTLY as I wanted them to do.


Welder, your thought process is disturbing.


----------



## NCHillbilly

WaltL1 said:


> First, I'm not claiming to be a Christian history authority so take what I say with a grain of salt
> But -
> Its the concept of an everlasting torture in this place called he11 that is not what is "original".
> The "original" concept, it is argued, is that the original he11 was not even meant for "us". It wasn't created for "us". It wasn't "us" that were originally intended to go there. Nor was it even called he11.
> Miquel touches on it here -



Well, apparently Jesus didn't hold to that view, per the examples above, and many others like them where he specifically speaks of all the unsaved being tormented forever in a lake of fire. I thought that Christianity was based on the teachings of Jesus? Isn't that what separates Christianity from Judaism?


----------



## 660griz

bullethead said:


> I know what will work!
> I'll have anonymous writers write my guide book to termites. I'll have them write hundreds and thousands of extra rules that never make the final cut and I'll have them do it over thousands of years. I will contradict myself, include historical lies, i will show fallability, but I will rely on these writers to figure it all out and hope it turns out how i want it to.
> I will stick these writings in various caves around Pennsylvania to be found in horribly deteriorated conditions and i will insist that no matter which little part of a termite community finds them that the rest of the termites worldwide will be held accountable for not obeying my rules.



Don't forget termite slavery, genocide, rape, termite sacrifice, and the chosen termite colony.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

NCHillbilly said:


> I thought that Christianity was based on the teachings of Jesus? Isn't that what separates Christianity from Judaism?



Some didn't get the memo.


----------



## welderguy

660griz said:


> Wow!
> 
> For starters, I never told the termites I love them. Nor did I claim to be a merciful human to termites.
> One last note, I didn't wipe out every termite on earth for the wrong doings of the ones around my house.



God never said He loves everybody. He also never said He was merciful to everybody. He didn't wipe out everyone either Noah found GRACE in the eyes of the Lord.

The concept that God loves everybody is from the man-based religion.


----------



## WaltL1

NCHillbilly said:


> Well, apparently Jesus didn't hold to that view, per the examples above, and many others like them where he specifically speaks of all the unsaved being tormented forever in a lake of fire. I thought that Christianity was based on the teachings of Jesus? Isn't that what separates Christianity from Judaism?


If Judaism had a story and Christianity took that story and changed it to fit their views, which story is the "original"?
I posted for you the original "story".
Lets forget what "Jesus said" for a moment.
Look to you to be pretty much the same concept?
Now consider which story came first.
And consider Christianity came from Judaism.
Which one would you call original?


----------



## bullethead

660griz said:


> Don't forget termite slavery, genocide, rape, termite sacrifice, and the chosen termite colony.



Now that I think of it,  i will just sit back and do nothing, I'll  let termites write whatever they want about whatever concept of a god that they want, let other termites decide to beleive in none of it, one, or all of it. Let the termites use those writings  to govern and justify conquering other termites. And the whole time I will just sit back, never let even one of them know I exist and hope that in my experiment at least one termite gets it all correct.
I will enjoy the termites that claim to know me, that will speak for me, that claim to be more special than other termites even though they are just as clueless as to whether or not I exist and had ANYHING to do with ANYTHING. The ones that will make claims that are unprovable will be by colorful termites because they will be my entertainment.
The termites that go about their daily business and do not bother anyone else will be my favorite. 

But in the end none of them will be rewarded or punished because I am a figment of their imagination as much as every single god that has is or will be worshipped by the same termites that follow religion now. I can call them termites because Welder speaks for god, and welder equates people with termites so in gods eyes it has GOT to be exactly the same.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> God never said He loves everybody. He also never said He was merciful to everybody. He didn't wipe out everyone either Noah found GRACE in the eyes of the Lord.
> 
> The concept that God loves everybody is from the man-based religion.



For god so loved the world that........

Must be one of those contradicting verses that does not apply here but will be used later when you tell us that god loves everyone.


----------



## WaltL1

bullethead said:


> For god so loved the world that........
> 
> Must be one of those contradicting verses that does not apply here but will be used later when you tell us that god loves everyone.


Kind of like this one -


> For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.


I guess little children drowning could be considered "merciful".
After all they may have grown up to be an A/A


----------



## NCHillbilly

WaltL1 said:


> If Judaism had a story and Christianity took that story and changed it to fit their views, which story is the "original"?
> I posted for you the original "story".
> Lets forget what "Jesus said" for a moment.
> Look to you to be pretty much the same concept?
> Now consider which story came first.
> And consider Christianity came from Judaism.
> Which one would you call original?




Yes, but we are talking about Christianity, which is based on the teachings of Christ; so how can we forget what Jesus said about burning people up in He11 forever and ever?

That discussion will have to wait until someone posts a thread starting with a meme of a rabbi threatening to throw an adulterer into the burning trash dump outside town for twelve years.


----------



## bullethead

Romans 5:8- But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

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 everlasting life.
neighbour, and hate thine enemy. CensoredCensored

1 John 4:10- Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son [to be] the propitiation for our sins.



1 John 4:8- He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.

Romans 11:32- For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

Leviticus 19:18- Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I [am] the LORD.


----------



## NCHillbilly

bullethead said:


> Now that I think of it,  i will just sit back and do nothing, I'll  let termites write whatever they want about whatever concept of a god that they want, let other termites decide to beleive in none of it, one, or all of it. Let the termites use those writings  to govern and justify conquering other termites. And the whole time I will just sit back, never let even one of them know I exist and hope that in my experiment at least one termite gets it all correct.
> I will enjoy the termites that claim to know me, that will speak for me, that claim to be more special than other termites even though they are just as clueless as to whether or not I exist and had ANYHING to do with ANYTHING. The ones that will make claims that are unprovable will be by colorful termites because they will be my entertainment.
> The termites that go about their daily business and do not bother anyone else will be my favorite.
> 
> But in the end none of them will be rewarded or punished because I am a figment of their imagination as much as every single god that has is or will be worshipped by the same termites that follow religion now. I can call them termites because Welder speaks for god, and welder equates people with termites so in gods eyes it has GOT to be exactly the same.



Every now and then on a really sunny day though, you need to work in mysterious ways and show your will by dragging out the magnifying glass.......


----------



## 660griz

NCHillbilly said:


> Every now and then on a really sunny day though, you need to work in mysterious ways and show your will by dragging out the magnifying glass.......



Oh yea.
The Lord giveth and the Lord seteth on fire.


----------



## bullethead

NCHillbilly said:


> Every now and then on a really sunny day though, you need to work in mysterious ways and show your will by dragging out the magnifying glass.......



Or, I will actually do nothing, and yet some of them will give me credit for everything that happens anyway.
The best part is, no matter if is it the most wonderful experience that they have ever had, or the most miserable and excrutiating pain along with inhumane suffering...they will think I did it AND will thank me for it because they are convinced that they deserved it!
I always win.


----------



## welderguy

I can always tell when I hit on a touchy point because this place lights up like a Christmas tree.

One more:
If you drew a picture of yourself (in your own image), then decided to destroy it ...just because, would you be evil for doing that? After all, it was yours to do with whatever you wished right?


----------



## NCHillbilly

bullethead said:


> Or, I will actually do nothing, and yet some of them will give me credit for everything that happens anyway.
> The best part is, no matter if is it the most wonderful experience that they have ever had, or the most miserable and excrutiating pain along with inhumane suffering...they will think I did it AND will thank me for it because they are convinced that they deserved it!
> I always win.



Nah, you need to show your wrath every now and then to keep 'em interested. Maybe turn the high-pressure hose nozzle or the leaf blower on the mound every now and then, perhaps spray a diluted insecticide on parts of the mound now and then to sicken and slowly kill a few thousand of them. 

Or if you really want to have some fun, maybe you could make a bet with the Orkin man that there's one really cool and rightous termite that lives down there. You can do experiments by rending his mud tubes asunder, smiting all his larvae with Diazinon, cause metal sheathing to be nailed firmly over the wood he eats, plague his kin by turning an armadillo loose in your basement or maybe some parasitic wasps, toast him just a little with the mag-glass now and then, and see if he still has faith in your faultless rightousness.


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> The concept that God loves everybody is from the man-based religion.



This man-based religion sounds much better than your alternative.


----------



## welderguy

centerpin fan said:


> This man-based religion sounds much better than your alternative.



That is exactly why the masses are following it. It elevates himself and diminishes his view of God.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> I can always tell when I hit on a touchy point because this place lights up like a Christmas tree.
> 
> One more:
> If you drew a picture of yourself (in your own image), then decided to destroy it ...just because, would you be evil for doing that? After all, it was yours to do with whatever you wished right?


We cannot convey to you, because of your skewed views of humananity, just how wrong you are. If you are incapable of discerning human life from bugs and self portraits then you have more important places that you should spend your time.

But I will answer you honestly because I am expecting an honest answer from you later.

A piece of paper or a photograph with my image on it is not a life that I made. It Therefore it is not unacceptable to crumple it up, light it on fire or cut it in half.

Now, one for you...
If you decide to kill your children, because they belong to you, they look like you, and you made them is that acceptable?

Don't punk out, answer honestly.


----------



## bullethead

NCHillbilly said:


> Nah, you need to show your wrath every now and then to keep 'em interested. Maybe turn the high-pressure hose nozzle or the leaf blower on the mound every now and then, perhaps spray a diluted insecticide on parts of the mound now and then to sicken and slowly kill a few thousand of them.
> 
> Or if you really want to have some fun, maybe you could make a bet with the Orkin man that there's one really cool and rightous termite that lives down there. You can do experiments by rending his mud tubes asunder, smiting all his larvae with Diazinon, cause metal sheathing to be nailed firmly over the wood he eats, plague his kin by turning an armadillo loose in your basement or maybe some parasitic wasps, toast him just a little with the mag-glass now and then, and see if he still has faith in your faultless rightousness.


Yes!
And the termites will STILL be under the impression that they DESERVE it!


----------



## centerpin fan

Anybody ever read Catch-22?  (Seeing the movie doesn't count.)

Anyway, there's a scene in the book where two atheist characters argue over what kind of god they don't believe in.  The god one atheist doesn't believe in is a cold, callous puppet master.  The god the other atheist doesn't believe in is a loving father who wants all to be saved.

Reminds me of this thread ...


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> That is exactly why the masses are following it ...



... or maybe because it's the faith "once for all delivered", the faith of the apostles.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> We cannot convey to you, because of your skewed views of humananity, just how wrong you are. If you are incapable of discerning human life from bugs and self portraits then you have more important places that you should spend your time.
> 
> But I will answer you honestly because I am expecting an honest answer from you later.
> 
> A piece of paper or a photograph with my image on it is not a life that I made. It Therefore it is not unacceptable to crumple it up, light it on fire or cut it in half.
> 
> Now, one for you...
> If you decide to kill your children, because they belong to you, they look like you, and you made them is that acceptable?
> 
> Don't punk out, answer honestly.



They do not belong to me and I did not make them. God did. He created EVERYTHING and EVERYTHING belongs to Him. I don't have the right to kill them but God does.


----------



## bullethead

centerpin fan said:


> Anybody ever read Catch-22?  (Seeing the movie doesn't count.)
> 
> Anyway, there's a scene in the book where two atheist characters argue over what kind of god they don't believe in.  The god one atheist doesn't believe in is a cold, callous puppet master.  The god the other atheist doesn't believe in is a loving father who wants all to be saved.
> 
> Reminds me of this thread ...



I have not read it but this thread reminds me more of believers that have different beliefs in god and the unbelievers have to play along and use the believers handbook to show them both that their god in those writing is both cold and calloused and loving and that the writings contradict itself.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> They do not belong to me and I did not make them. God did. He created EVERYTHING and EVERYTHING belongs to Him. I don't have the right to kill them but God does.



I am gonna have to put you on the ignore list. I am not fluent in insane and crazy.
You seriously should seek help. 

Do me a favor and tell your wife and kids that same thing. You'll get the help that you need.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> I have not read it but this thread reminds me more of believers that have different beliefs in god and the unbelievers have to play along and use the believers handbook to show them both that their god in those writing is both cold and calloused and loving and that the writings contradict itself.



So you agree with what I've been saying then.
That God loves some and hates others. Thankyou for confirming that.


----------



## centerpin fan

16 people reading this ...


----------



## centerpin fan

20!!!


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> So you agree with what I've been saying then.
> That God loves some and hates others. Thankyou for confirming that.



Welder you are incapable of discerning what anything truly means.
You take whateber snippets that fit your needs and use them while disregarding the truth.

But you have confirmed that no real God exists and that you follow fallible man made writings.
Thank you for that


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> God loves some and hates others.



It won't be easy turning that into a catchy Sunday School tune.


----------



## bullethead

centerpin fan said:


> It won't be easy turning that into a catchy Sunday School tune.


Welder would get the Private Pyle pillowcase and soap treatment at biibe camp  with his style of interpretation.

He literally IGNORES the words of what he says is his god in the bible to further his own beliefs.
I gave him verses that say God loves everyone and he wont address them.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> They do not belong to me and I did not make them. God did. He created EVERYTHING and EVERYTHING belongs to Him. I don't have the right to kill them but God does.


Sorry but I gotta jump in here 
Please give us an example where you would consider killing your children. Of course, you wouldn't because you don't have that right but give an example of where you would if you did have that right.


----------



## WaltL1

centerpin fan said:


> It won't be easy turning that into a catchy Sunday School tune.


Indoctrination at its cutest!


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> Sorry but I gotta jump in here
> Please give us an example where you would consider killing your children. Of course, you wouldn't because you don't have that right but give an example of where you would if you did have that right.



I wouldn't.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> For god so loved the world that........
> 
> Must be one of those contradicting verses that does not apply here but will be used later when you tell us that god loves everyone.



Why don't you finish the verse?

...." that he gave his only begotten Son, THAT WHOSOEVER BELIEVES ON HIM should not perish, but have everlasting life."


So tell me, does every body believe on Him? Including yourself? Hmmm?


----------



## 1gr8bldr

NCHillbilly said:


> So this isn't the concept of heaven and He11, or it was added later?
> 
> _11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
> 
> 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
> 
> 13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and CensoredCensoredCensoredCensored delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
> 
> 14 And death and CensoredCensoredCensoredCensored were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
> 
> 15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire._
> 
> 
> 
> And Jesus didn't actually say this:
> 
> _40 “As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age.
> 
> 41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil.
> 
> 42 They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
> 
> 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Whoever has ears, let them hear."_
> 
> 
> 
> Or this?
> _
> 22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
> 
> 23 And in CensoredCensoredCensoredCensored he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
> 
> 24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
> 
> 25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime received thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented._
> 
> 
> 
> Or this, and much more like it?
> 
> _47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into CensoredCensoredCensoredCensored fire:
> 
> 48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched._
> 
> Now I'm really confused. So, one of the main themes of the Bible and the whole Christian belief system is not real, and was "added," and Jesus didn't really say what the Bible says he said?
> 
> How could one be a Christian and claim that the Bible is the Word of God, but not believe in punishment via He11 for non-believers?


I used to know these arguments like I know my own hand. However, been awhile. There are two verses only that give indication of something like the modern day version of he11. Two of them you mentioned. The early church was controlled by the catholic opression for many years. They were told what to believe. The fight to get bibles printed was with much bloodshed because they did not want people to find out the truths. They wanted to control them. And they did. He11 was the perfect tool to sway people into line. In most all cases the word was Genna, if I recall. Which was a trash dump outside the city where people brought their trash and dung. It was a constant supply where the fire never went out, although everything gets consumed. Lets forget translating and look at context. Paul said he wished he could die, be cut off if it would save the jews. Now if he had known or taught it to be everlasting torment, then he would have never agreed to this.  The OT is completely void of eternal suffering. He11 in it's context is for the fallen angels who are eternal. They have no other place. If anyone actually studies this he11 concept they will quickly see it is twisted into the text by corrupt translation. Anyone disagrees then they have a shut mind. Of 30 socalled verses, only two look this way, and they can easily be looked at from a parable mindset. You can't build a doctrine on two verses. Lazurus, and I can't recall the other. Keep the mindset that you need to prove that the verse implies eternal torment and not everlasting, irreversible destruction. It's played as irreversible because a time exist when you can repent, until it's to late. But not to late to be saved from eternal torment, but to late to receive eternal life. Christianity has always been about a way to reverse the curse, reconcile back to God's original plan of Adam and his offspring to be eternal. I don't care to argue with the bible thumpers, I just hoped that I offered something that made nonbelievers realize that God is not that cruel. And yes, modern day Christianity as we know it loves the burn concept.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Why don't you finish the verse?
> 
> ...." that he gave his only begotten Son, THAT WHOSOEVER BELIEVES ON HIM should not perish, but have everlasting life."
> 
> 
> So tell me, does every body believe on Him? Including yourself? Hmmm?


Pick the one that fits weldy....


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Pick the one that fits weldy....



Ok then you pick and we'll discuss it. Any one you like.


----------



## Israel

I tell you, use worldly wealth to make friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, they will welcome you into eternal dwellings. Whoever is faithful with very little will also be faithful with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much. If, then, you have not been faithful with worldly wealth, who will entrust you with true riches?

And if you have not been faithful with the belongings of another, who will give you belongings of your own?

The torment comes no less by revelation than the glory.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Ok then you pick and we'll discuss it. Any one you like.



No thanks. I don't have to play with a skunk to know it stinks.
I got a whiff earlier and that was enough.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> No thanks. I don't have to play with a skunk to know it stinks.
> I got a whiff earlier and that was enough.



lame


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> lame



Look at the bright side, when you go to church you can sit in your own pew.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Look at the bright side, when you go to church you can sit in your own pew.



even more lame


----------



## NCHillbilly

The only feasible reason to worship the God that Welder envisions would be out of fear, to escape his eternal wrath. His God is similar to the God of my backwoods Baptist upbringing, except for the predestination. Backwoods baptists love them some He11fire and brimstone, but aren't big on predestination.


----------



## welderguy

NCHillbilly said:


> The only feasible reason to worship the God that Welder envisions would be out of fear, to escape his eternal wrath. His God is similar to the God of my backwoods Baptist upbringing, except for the predestination. Backwoods baptists love them some He11fire and brimstone, but aren't big on predestination.



Not the way I see it at all. I want to worship Him because of His sovereign grace that He bestowed on my undeserving soul. Not out of fear, but because I love Him. He didn't have to love me but He did, for some reason unknown to me. Just because He wanted to I guess.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Not the way I see it at all. I want to worship Him because of His sovereign grace that He bestowed on my undeserving soul. Not out of fear, but because I love Him. He didn't have to love me but He did, for some reason unknown to me. Just because He wanted to I guess.



In layman's terms, ...I am uncomfortable with myself and this invisible thing fills a void in my life.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> In layman's terms, ...I am uncomfortable with myself and this invisible thing fills a void in my life.



...says the guy, who admittedly knows nothing about spiritual matters but diagnoses other's spiritual inefficiencies.


----------



## WaltL1

NCHillbilly said:


> The only feasible reason to worship the God that Welder envisions would be out of fear, to escape his eternal wrath. His God is similar to the God of my backwoods Baptist upbringing, except for the predestination. Backwoods baptists love them some He11fire and brimstone, but aren't big on predestination.



Just my opinion here -
I think fear is certainly one of the reasons.
But I think there are a number of other reasons too.
In particular, The God Welder envisions chose him in particular. He's worked it out so that the reason he believes is because he was chosen to believe by God. Thereby guaranteeing him a ticket to the big show in the sky, God's love and all those good things that go with it.
Remember, the God Welder envisions loves some and hates others. By being chosen, he's on the love list.
I would imagine that is a very reassuring, calming, happy etc. etc.  feeling for him.


----------



## Israel

NCHillbilly said:


> The only feasible reason to worship the God that Welder envisions would be out of fear, to escape his eternal wrath. His God is similar to the God of my backwoods Baptist upbringing, except for the predestination. Backwoods baptists love them some He11fire and brimstone, but aren't big on predestination.



Why wouldn't that be sufficient for _a man_?


----------



## WaltL1

Israel said:


> Why wouldn't that be sufficient for _a man_?


Does fear equate to worship?
wor·ship
[ËˆwÉ™rSHÉ™p]
NOUN
the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity: 
"the worship of God" · [more]
synonyms: reverence · veneration · adoration · glorification · glory · exaltation · [more]
VERB
show reverence and adoration for (a deity); honor with religious rites:

EDIT by the way its kind of  a general question. I'm not debating your point.


----------



## Israel

WaltL1 said:


> Does fear equate to worship?
> wor·ship
> [ËˆwÉ™rSHÉ™p]
> NOUN
> the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity:
> "the worship of God" · [more]
> synonyms: reverence · veneration · adoration · glorification · glory · exaltation · [more]
> VERB
> show reverence and adoration for (a deity); honor with religious rites:


Good question Walt.

But I don't believe they equate. The reason for a thing...to a man, is not the same as the thing itself.  

And I become older and more tedious, by the day. But, I have seen, what I have seen. As have you.


----------



## welderguy

I can honestly say that I have never feared he11. Before I was changed, it was bliss through ignorance. But after I was changed, the love of God dispelled all my fear. "There is no fear in love".
The fear that compels me to worship now is the reverence kind. Quite different from the scared kind.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

WaltL1 said:


> Does fear equate to worship?
> wor·ship
> [ËˆwÉ™rSHÉ™p]
> NOUN
> the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity:
> "the worship of God" · [more]
> synonyms: reverence · veneration · adoration · glorification · glory · exaltation · [more]
> VERB
> show reverence and adoration for (a deity); honor with religious rites:
> 
> EDIT by the way its kind of  a general question. I'm not debating your point.



I can't speak for everyone else, but I worship out of faith. 
I fear as a human out of failure to be good enough/ worthy of His countenance. 



Israel said:


> Good question Walt.
> 
> But I don't believe they equate. The reason for a thing...to a man, is not the same as the thing itself.
> 
> And I become older and more tedious, by the day. But, I have seen, what I have seen. As have you.



Interesting perspective. I've never considered God a "thing", not even a "person". I've always accepted God as God, nothing tangible I can touch or see, the Great I Am, the Alpha and Omega, beyond the comprehension of most, incapable of being understood at how great the depths of His omniscience and power go. 

I'm not sure our language has a word for what He is, other than God. Certainly not "a thing".


----------



## NCHillbilly

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I can't speak for everyone else, but I worship out of faith.
> I fear as a human out of failure to be good enough/ worthy of His countenance.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting perspective. I've never considered God a "thing", not even a "person". I've always accepted God as God, nothing tangible I can touch or see, the Great I Am, the Alpha and Omega, beyond the comprehension of most, incapable of being understood at how great the depths of His omniscience and power go.
> 
> I'm not sure our language has a word for what He is, other than God. Certainly not "a thing".



Yes, I agree. If God is out there, he/she/it is likely far beyond our understanding or comprehension. That is why I am wary of anyone who claims to know exactly what God wants or demands or does; or the reasons behind it.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

NCHillbilly said:


> Yes, I agree. If God is out there, he/she/it is likely far beyond our understanding or comprehension. That is why I am wary of anyone who claims to know exactly what God wants or demands or does; or the reasons behind it.



Like that day they met their demise playing golf because God told them to go to the cliff, and they fell off? When in front of His amazing presence when they really were able to hear Him they ask; God, why did you tell me to go to the edge of the cliff? God responds; You Idiot!!! I was saying approach wedge, not approach the edge. And you still didn't listen to me, and used a 9 iron before falling off of the cliff.


----------



## WaltL1

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I can't speak for everyone else, but I worship out of faith.
> I fear as a human out of failure to be good enough/ worthy of His countenance.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting perspective. I've never considered God a "thing", not even a "person". I've always accepted God as God, nothing tangible I can touch or see, the Great I Am, the Alpha and Omega, beyond the comprehension of most, incapable of being understood at how great the depths of His omniscience and power go.
> 
> I'm not sure our language has a word for what He is, other than God. Certainly not "a thing".


This I can get -


> I can't speak for everyone else, but I worship out of faith.
> I fear as a human out of failure to be good enough/ worthy of His countenance.


Your fear is not of Him, its of your own possible shortcomings. So to me, that's a bit different.
I just have trouble with the whole worship what you fear concept.
Its possible that its my view of what "worship" should mean so that's why I'm asking this general question.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> ...says the guy, who admittedly knows nothing about spiritual matters but diagnoses other's spiritual inefficiencies.



Admittedly...?
 When?

But boy am I good at diagnosing your spiritual  inefficiencies.


----------



## bullethead

WaltL1 said:


> Just my opinion here -
> I think fear is certainly one of the reasons.
> But I think there are a number of other reasons too.
> In particular, The God Welder envisions chose him in particular. He's worked it out so that the reason he believes is because he was chosen to believe by God. Thereby guaranteeing him a ticket to the big show in the sky, God's love and all those good things that go with it.
> Remember, the God Welder envisions loves some and hates others. By being chosen, he's on the love list.
> I would imagine that is a very reassuring, calming, happy etc. etc.  feeling for him.


It sure is reassuring, calming happy and for those reasons it is why people convince themselves that they got the golden ticket. It is easier to deal with mortality that way.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

bullethead said:


> Admittedly...?
> When?
> 
> But boy am I good at diagnosing your spiritual  inefficiencies.



Or needling. Like a gnat on a wound.


----------



## bullethead

Israel said:


> Why wouldn't that be sufficient for _a man_?



One of the best crutches going. Highly sufficient.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> I can honestly say that I have never feared he11. Before I was changed, it was bliss through ignorance. But after I was changed, the love of God dispelled all my fear. "There is no fear in love".
> The fear that compels me to worship now is the reverence kind. Quite different from the scared kind.


Amazing how lots of people "change" and then find a god too.


----------



## WaltL1

bullethead said:


> It sure is reassuring, calming happy and for those reasons it is why people convince themselves that they got the golden ticket. It is easier to deal with mortality that way.





> Or needling. Like a gnat on a wound.




(pokin' a little fun at you my friend)


----------



## bullethead

NCHillbilly said:


> Yes, I agree. If God is out there, he/she/it is likely far beyond our understanding or comprehension. That is why I am wary of anyone who claims to know exactly what God wants or demands or does; or the reasons behind it.



Ding ding ding ding ding!!!!!!
PRECISELY!


----------



## bullethead

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Or needling. Like a gnat on a wound.



Welder likes to say things that he hopes hits nerves.
I am not needling. But i know when an accurate assessment hits home.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

NCHillbilly said:


> Yes, I agree. If God is out there,



"Out there" is an interesting introspective that I've heard reference to from an Atheist buddy of mine. My response to him was "Out there?" as in somewhere other than here?

I have no clue where He is, and could be anywhere, or nowhere or everywhere all at the same time. He could be sitting in the back seat of my truck as we are driving and talking. His presence is unfathomable by humans, but to assign him a location is very human, as if assigning him a form and identity. My comment to him was it was interesting that an Atheist of all people was assigning human parameters to him, while me, a believer was giving him the benefit of omnipresence, not assigning human boundaries. 

We could both be right, or we could both be wrong.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> I can honestly say that I have never feared he11. Before I was changed, it was bliss through ignorance. But after I was changed, the love of God dispelled all my fear. "There is no fear in love".
> The fear that compels me to worship now is the reverence kind. Quite different from the scared kind.





> I can honestly say that I have never feared he11.


That's one of the benefits of your Elect beliefs.
Before you were ignorant and now you are chosen. 
You have never had a reason to fear he11.


----------



## WaltL1

Miguel Cervantes said:


> "Out there" is an interesting introspective that I've heard reference to from an Atheist buddy of mine. My response to him was "Out there?" as in somewhere other than here?
> 
> I have no clue where He is, and could be anywhere, or nowhere or everywhere all at the same time. He could be sitting in the back seat of my truck as we are driving and talking. His presence is unfathomable by humans, but to assign him a location is very human, as if assigning him a form and identity. My comment to him was it was interesting that an Atheist of all people was assigning human parameters to him, while me, a believer was giving him the benefit of omnipresence, not assigning human boundaries.
> 
> We could both be right, or we could both be wrong.





> but to assign him a location is very human, as if assigning him a form and identity.


I cant help but take this a step further in my own mind..
Isnt this "kinda sorta" what Christianity is doing? "Humanizing" God, making him relatable, so that we can fathom him and worship him? 
Heck, aren't we as humans supposedly created in his image? That's pretty clearly assigning a form and identity.
I agree its all very human.
That's one of my problems with it.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Admittedly...?
> When?
> 
> But boy am I good at diagnosing your spiritual  inefficiencies.



So now you're telling me you know about spiritual matters?
Is this firsthand knowledge or secondhand? Either way, I'd love to hear about that if you wouldn't mind. You have my most undevided attention.
Take all the time and bandwidth you need. I'm here all day.


----------



## bullethead

WaltL1 said:


> I cant help but take this a step further in my own mind..
> Isnt this "kinda sorta" what Christianity is doing? "Humanizing" God, making him relatable, so that we can fathom him and worship him?
> Heck, aren't we as humans supposedly created in his image? That's pretty clearly assigning a form and identity.
> I agree its all very human.
> That's one of my problems with it.



Exactly. Humans assign human qualities to dang near everything.
I am at the beach now and I cannot tell you how many times I've heard my wife and daughter in law say "aww look at how cute this is" and it is a small seashell. The bigger ones are just nice.
Dogs give  "kisses"
Elephants  "cry "
And on and on and on.

And Miguel is certainly thinking clearly but believers and non believers have to assign human qualities to things in order to relate..and those are for tangible things thay we interact with daily.

Now how in the heck can people assign qualities, read the mind, know the wishes, speak for and think in any way shape or form that if such a being that is beyond our realm exists  that they know any more about it than the next guy and not only know about this god but that they are authorities on the subject because they are more special than the next person.

Believers and Nonbelievers alike....

But it is all good fodder for forums like this and why i participate.
I am truly interested in anyone that can back up their claims.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> So now you're telling me you know about spiritual matters?
> Is this firsthand knowledge or secondhand? Either way, I'd love to hear about that if you wouldn't mind. You have my most undevided attention.
> Take all the time and bandwidth you need. I'm here all day.


I know about psychological matters.
I will give you my expert diagnosis as I see fit as you continue to post reasons why you need an invisible buddy.
But thank you for the leeway


----------



## NCHillbilly

Miguel Cervantes said:


> "Out there" is an interesting introspective that I've heard reference to from an Atheist buddy of mine. My response to him was "Out there?" as in somewhere other than here?
> 
> I have no clue where He is, and could be anywhere, or nowhere or everywhere all at the same time. He could be sitting in the back seat of my truck as we are driving and talking. His presence is unfathomable by humans, but to assign him a location is very human, as if assigning him a form and identity. My comment to him was it was interesting that an Atheist of all people was assigning human parameters to him, while me, a believer was giving him the benefit of omnipresence, not assigning human boundaries.
> 
> We could both be right, or we could both be wrong.


Yes, I guess "out there" is a poor choice of words. God as I imagine he/she/it, would be out there, in here, and everywhere else at the same time. And it would perhaps reveal itself to different people or cultures in different manners or forms, any of which are but a portion or different face of the overall thing.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Yep.
> I will give you my expert diagnosis as I see fit as you continue to post reasons why you need an invisible buddy.
> But thank you for the leeway



Yep. Just as I thought. Zilch. Zero. Nothing. Nada.

So predictable.
You get on your soapbox like you're some kind of authority on spiritual matters, but when it's time to reveal any true knowledge of the spiritual, nothing but foolish banter.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Yep. Just as I thought. Zilch. Zero. Nothing. Nada.
> 
> So predictable.
> You get on your soapbox like you're some kind of authority on spiritual matters, but when it's time to reveal any true knowledge of the spiritual, nothing but foolish banter.



I dont claim to be an authority on the make believe, just people who live in the make believe. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn one time.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> Yep. Just as I thought. Zilch. Zero. Nothing. Nada.
> 
> So predictable.
> You get on your soapbox like you're some kind of authority on spiritual matters, but when it's time to reveal any true knowledge of the spiritual, nothing but foolish banter.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> I dont claim to be an authority on the make believe, just people who live in the make believe. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn one time.



You're like a blind homeless man with a rusty pocket knife who breaks into a hospital and tries to perform brain surgery on a heart patient.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> You're like a blind homeless man with a rusty pocket knife who breaks into a hospital and tries to perform brain surgery on a heart patient.



With the talent and skills to not only get it done but do it with excellence. The handicap is not an excuse for me to need an invisible buddy, it is motivation for me to excel personally.
Try it.

Ps, the hospital calls me when only the best will do.


----------



## ambush80

Whoa!!!

This one took off!  I've got some catching up to do.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> With the talent and skills to not only get it done but do it with excellence. The handicap is not an excuse for me to need an invisible buddy, it it motivation for me to excel personally.
> Try it.
> 
> Ps, the hospital calls me when only the best will do.



Oh yeah. You butchered that poor heart patient real good. He doesn't worry at all about his heart anymore. He's too busy wondering about his big hole in his head.

P.S. The hospital can't get hold of you. You left your stolen cell phone in the Holiday Inn that you broke into.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Oh yeah. You butchered that poor heart patient real good. He doesn't worry at all about his heart anymore. He's too busy wondering about his big hole in his head.
> 
> P.S. The hospital can't get hold of you. You left your stolen cell phone in the Holiday Inn that you broke into.


Weldsy... again you are making up stories in order to compensate for your lack of knowledge. 
Life isnt about living in a fantasy world.
Unless you are Wlder Mitty.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Weldsy... again you are making up stories in order to compensate for your lack of knowledge.
> Life isnt about living in a fantasy world.
> Unless you are Wlder Mitty.



Sure, we can get back to seriousness if you want.
Just give me one clue as to the depth of ANY spiritual awareness you may have.

If not, then admit you are clueless about things of the spirit.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

WaltL1 said:


> I cant help but take this a step further in my own mind..
> Isnt this "kinda sorta" what Christianity is doing? "Humanizing" God, making him relatable, so that we can fathom him and worship him?
> Heck, aren't we as humans supposedly created in his image? That's pretty clearly assigning a form and identity.
> I agree its all very human.
> That's one of my problems with it.



Not "his" image, but instead "their" image. Remember in Genesis the creation of man was described using a plurality. I have read countless documents attempting to explain that one away in modern day terms under the MOS for modern day worship. There is no cut and dry since there is no translation from greek or hebrew in the interlinear scripture for "us" and "our" in the context of it's original intent. 

Heck, even the show "Ancient Aliens" has taken a shot at Genesis laying claim to that being proof of our origin. 

I have no doubt that a few of us came from that stock.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Sure, we can get back to seriousness if you want.
> Just give me one clue as to the depth of ANY spiritual awareness you may have.
> 
> If not, then admit you are clueless about things of the spirit.


I have an invisible master. We talk to each other.  I speak for him. He is with me always. Good times and bad. Uncanny as it may seem, HE likes the same people that I do and smites the ones we don't like. HE loves everyone that loves him back. HE is just. Everyone is welcome to send him a friend request but he will only accept the people who HE already picked to be in his inner circle.
HE allows me to live and I am grateful. HE can allow a dreadful disease to overtake me, but I would still be grateful. His will governs our universe.


----------



## bullethead

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Not "his" image, but instead "their" image. Remember in Genesis the creation of man was described using a plurality. I have read countless documents attempting to explain that one away in modern day terms under the MOS for modern day worship. There is no cut and dry since there is no translation from greek or hebrew in the interlinear scripture for "us" and "our" in the context of it's original intent.
> 
> Heck, even the show "Ancient Aliens" has taken a shot at Genesis laying claim to that being proof of our origin.
> 
> I have no doubt that a few of us came from that stock.


Sincerely,  who, in your opinion is "their" that the writers mentioned?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

bullethead said:


> Sincerely,  who, in your opinion is "their" that the writers mentioned?



I would dare not venture a guess without a deeper understanding of the root language used in the original text. To do otherwise is mere folly in both the eyes of man and God.


----------



## bullethead

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I would dare not venture a guess without a deeper understanding of the root language used in the original text. To do otherwise is mere folly in both the eyes of man and God.



Thanks. I appreciate the honesty.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> I have an invisible master. We talk to each other.  I speak for him. He is with me always. Good times and bad. Uncanny as it may seem, HE likes the same people that I do and smites the ones we don't like. HE loves everyone that loves him back. HE is just. Everyone is welcome to send him a friend request but he will only accept the people who HE already picked to be in his inner circle.
> HE allows me to live and I am grateful. HE can allow a dreadful disease to overtake me, but I would still be grateful. His will governs our universe.



Your facetiousness only equates to dishonesty here.
I really thought you'd be man enough to give an honest and serious answer, but I guess not.
Never mind. You proved my point regardless.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

welderguy said:


> Your facetiousness only equates to dishonesty here.
> I really thought you'd be man enough to give an honest and serious answer, but I guess not.
> Never mind. You proved my point regardless.



If a boy from a tribe deep in the Amazon had never seen any modern technology beyond perhaps a ferro rod and flint to aid in making a fire. Assume for a minute you want to talk to him about modern day airplanes and expect him to grasp the concept. He would think you as loony as a drunk monkey. 

Now apply that potential to the fact that the Church has been faltering in the last 5 or more decades in getting the message out to the people here in the good ol' US of A. Concentrating on other places in the world. Removing splinters across the globe while ignoring it's own plank of poverty, homelessness and destitution. 

Is it so unfathomable that there are those within the boundaries of our own nation that have never, or were never as a child exposed to the word of God?

If I were that child in the amazon, I would be a gnat on an open wound also, were you to come at me with such a bizarre tale. 

Not saying this is the case here, but using assumptions that every ear in the US has heard is a bad baseline for presenting what you know. Fear not however, in the end, every knee shall bow.


----------



## welderguy

Miguel Cervantes said:


> If a boy from a tribe deep in the Amazon had never seen any modern technology beyond perhaps a ferro rod and flint to aid in making a fire. Assume for a minute you want to talk to him about modern day airplanes and expect him to grasp the concept. He would think you as loony as a drunk monkey.
> 
> Now apply that potential to the fact that the Church has been faltering in the last 5 or more decades in getting the message out to the people here in the good ol' US of A. Concentrating on other places in the world. Removing splinters across the globe while ignoring it's own plank of poverty, homelessness and destitution.
> 
> Is it so unfathomable that there are those within the boundaries of our own nation that have never, or were never as a child exposed to the word of God?
> 
> If I were that child in the amazon, I would be a gnat on an open wound also, were you to come at me with such a bizarre tale.
> 
> Not saying this is the case here, but using assumptions that every ear in the US has heard is a bad baseline for presenting what you know. Fear not however, in the end, every knee shall bow.



Are you under an impression that I'm trying to spread the gospel to bullet head or get him saved?
I've been getting that alot lately.
I'm not.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

welderguy said:


> Are you under an impression that I'm trying to spread the gospel to bullet head or get him saved?
> I've been getting that alot lately.
> I'm not.




Then what is your purpose?


----------



## welderguy

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Then what is your purpose?



Just trying to have a friendly discussion.

No agenda.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

welderguy said:


> Your facetiousness only equates to dishonesty here.
> I really thought you'd be man enough to give an honest and serious answer, but I guess not.





welderguy said:


> Just trying to have a friendly discussion.



Perhaps.


----------



## Israel

> The only feasible reason to worship the God that Welder envisions would be out of fear, to escape his eternal wrath.





> Why wouldn't that be sufficient for a man?







WaltL1 said:


> Does fear equate to worship?
> wor·ship
> [ËˆwÉ™rSHÉ™p]
> NOUN
> the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity:
> "the worship of God" · [more]
> synonyms: reverence · veneration · adoration · glorification · glory · exaltation · [more]
> VERB
> show reverence and adoration for (a deity); honor with religious rites:
> 
> EDIT by the way its kind of  a general question. I'm not debating your point.





> Good question Walt.
> 
> But I don't believe they equate. The reason for a thing...to a man, is not the same as the thing itself.



Walt, before confusion was introduced, 





> Interesting perspective. I've never considered God a "thing", not even a "person". I've always accepted God as God, nothing tangible I can touch or see, the Great I Am, the Alpha and Omega, beyond the comprehension of most, incapable of being understood at how great the depths of His omniscience and power go.
> 
> I'm not sure our language has a word for what He is, other than God. Certainly not "a thing".




the "thing" is worship, (not God) of which question was found as to whether fear was sufficient to that "thing".


----------



## welderguy

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Perhaps.



Oh that's mild compared to how our conversations usually end up. Do a search and you'll see.

But rest assured, there's no love loss between us, at least not on my end. I love that guy.


----------



## bullethead

Oy





welderguy said:


> Your facetiousness only equates to dishonesty here.
> I really thought you'd be man enough to give an honest and serious answer, but I guess not.
> Never mind. You proved my point regardless.


Whats the matter? You  cant take what you dish out?
Welder, you blatantly said in here and other threads how you purposely say things to get a rise out of the guys.
And as soon as you are called out for it and especially when someone out welders you then you all of a sudden want to talk serious. When called out on it you put your hands in the air and act as if you are being picked on.

The minute you start backing up your claims people will treat you seriously.

Miguel and others are  at least honest when they get to a point where they admit that they just don't know. That is respectable. 

You are clear on your purpose. Your discussion isnt friendly. And I only play your style so far until I give it right back to you,  and then you dont like it.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Whats the matter? You dont cant take what you dish out?
> Welder, you blatantly said in here and other threads how you purposely say things to get a rise out of the guys.
> And as soon as you are called out for it and especially when someone out welders you then you all of a sudden want to talk serious. When called out on it you put your hands in the air and act as if you are being picked on.
> 
> The minute you start backing up your claims people will treat you seriously.
> 
> Miguel and others are  at least honest when they get to a point where they admit that they just don't know. That is respectable.
> 
> You are clear on your purpose. Your discussion isnt friendly. And I only play your style so far until I give it right back to you,  and then you dont like it.



None of what I have said today was intended to be heard with a negative tone. But after going back through it, I understand how that may have been perceived. For that, I am sorry.

It's hard sometimes to relay passion without coming across as being rude and hurtful.

The bottom line is this. I know you don't have the ability to see spiritual things. I wasn't holding that against you, I just wanted you to see it. I guess I took it too far. Sorry.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> Are you under an impression that I'm trying to spread the gospel to bullet head or get him saved?
> I've been getting that alot lately.
> I'm not.


Turn away Welder, don't look now but......
I'm with you on this one. 
I don't think your intention is to try save anybody.
Your Elect beliefs and trying to save somebody are pretty much the opposite thing.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> None of what I have said today was intended to be heard with a negative tone. But after going back through it, I understand how that may have been perceived. For that, I am sorry.
> 
> It's hard sometimes to relay passion without coming across as being rude and hurtful.
> 
> The bottom line is this. I know you don't have the ability to see spiritual things. I wasn't holding that against you, I just wanted you to see it. I guess I took it too far. Sorry.


 Here is the deal. I can see why things are taken as spiritual. I did it for 20 years. When I wanted to get closer to finding out why they are so spiritual the farther it took me away from imagination and the closer I get to reality.

I can appreciate the laughter of a toddler. I appreciate the overwhelming feeling I get when I am alone in the woods and the sun is rising. I tear up at times when I walk some battlefields, the magnitude of courage and sacrafice grips me to the core. 

I can tell an islander all about a jet. I can make claims about how fast it is and loud it is and everything about the jet.
I can make things up about the jet that i think are true but I have no proof of.
He may not believe pictures i show him. He most certainly isnt gonna believe old writings about a jet.
If it comes to the point where that islander calls my bluff and wants to see a jet I can show him one. He can touch it. He can ride in it.
I can back up my claims.

We are beyond text. Well past your claims.
All I ask is for you to put up or shut up.
Or
Be honest enough to me and yourself and admit  that with every fiber in your bones you think your beliefs are true but the truth is that you just dont know for sure.

Is it too much to ask for of someone to be able to back up what they constantly say is the truth?
Why is it so hard to prove the truth?


----------



## SemperFiDawg

WaltL1 said:


> Its not just determinism.
> Right off the bat you have a God who drowned unborn babies, innocent children, women, men because they didn't act right. And supposedly he knew they weren't going to act right before he created them. And, as God, he certainly could have dealt with that situation in a number of ways. But he chose a little swim for his beloved children........
> Plenty of "sadistic author of evil" stuff to go around.





> drowned unborn babies,innocent children, women, men because they didn't act right.



UHHH, to point out the obvious, (and your contradiction) if 





> they didn't act right


 they weren't innocent which is exactly what the Bible says about them.

Plenty of caricatures to go around too it seems


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> I'm not saying God can't or won't use me in some way or another in His Kingdom. Just because I don't believe I can get someone saved doesn't mean there's not a purpose for me in His Kingdom. If I never did anything other than tell what good things Jesus has done for me, it would not be a waste of time.(*remember the wild Gadarean*?)
> But, see, even though not everyone is a potential follower, we simply don't know who is and who isn't. They don't have a big E stamped on their foreheads. I bet everyone who knew the thief on the cross had him pegged for he11. But not so.
> And besides, it doesn't matter anyway, because we are told to love even our enemies and pray for them.(coals of fire on their heads)



I actually killed one of those back in 82 but it went bad in the freezer before I could get it to a taxidermist.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Here is the deal. I can see why things are taken as spiritual. I did it for 20 years. When I wanted to get closer to finding out why they are so spiritual the farther it took me away from imagination and the closer I get to reality.
> 
> I can appreciate the laughter of a toddler. I appreciate the overwhelming feeling I get when I am alone in the woods and the sun is rising. I tear up at times when I walk some battlefields, the magnitude of courage and sacrafice grips me to the core.
> 
> I can tell an islander all about a jet. I can make claims about how fast it is and loud it is and everything about the jet.
> I can make things up about the jet that i think are true but I have no proof of.
> He may not believe pictures i show him. He most certainly isnt gonna believe old writings about a jet.
> If it comes to the point where that islander calls my bluff and wants to see a jet I can show him one. He can touch it. He can ride in it.
> I can back up my claims.
> 
> We are beyond text. Well past your claims.
> All I ask is for you to put up or shut up.
> Or
> Be honest enough to me and yourself and admit  that with every fiber in your bones you think your beliefs are true but the truth is that you just dont know for sure.
> 
> Is it too much to ask for of someone to be able to back up what they constantly say is the truth?
> Why is it so hard to prove the truth?



Well, I'm not going to keep beating this horse with you especially after I just apologized for it.
All I can say is my proof is spiritual, and it requires being spiritual to see it. I honestly hope some day God will put His Spirit in you so you can see what I see. I mean that with every fiber of my being.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

WaltL1 said:


> Not answering for 1gr8bldr but I think "added" isn't really the proper word. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, the Heaven/He11 concept wasn't the original teachings. There were snippets that could be interpreted as such but it wasn't what was taught. The focus was on "Heaven".
> The He11 concept grew in popularity as it proved to be much more successful at putting butts in seats.
> That morphed into exactly what you described.
> Fear is a strong motivator.



Yes.  Just like pain, its a good thing.  It keeps people alive and safe.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Well, I'm not going to keep beating this horse with you especially after I just apologized for it.
> All I can say is my proof is spiritual, and it requires being spiritual to see it. I honestly hope some day God will put His Spirit in you so you can see what I see. I mean that with every fiber of my being.


Anytime he wants I am ready. Anytime any god wants to enlighten me I am ready.

Again though, I do not believe that you are any more spiritual than anyone else. That stuff is a self given title.


----------



## NCHillbilly

SemperFiDawg said:


> UHHH, to point out the obvious, (and your contradiction) if  they weren't innocent which is exactly what the Bible says about them.



If only their 5000x great-grandma hadn't talked to that snake.....


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> The concept that God loves everybody is from the man-based religion.



SMH  Wow!  Just Wow!


----------



## SemperFiDawg

bullethead said:


> But you have confirmed that no real God exists and that you follow fallible man made writings.
> Thank you for that



So welder has proven a negative.  He should take great pride in that.  Until him it's always been thought impossible.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

NCHillbilly said:


> Yes, I agree. If God is out there, he/she/it is likely far beyond our understanding or comprehension. That is why I am wary of anyone who claims to know exactly what God wants or demands or does; or the reasons behind it.



Beyond understanding completely and comprehending completely.  Absolutely correct, but not beyond communicating on our level.  To make that assumption is a bit premature.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

bullethead said:


> Sincerely,  who, in your opinion is "their" that the writers mentioned?



Not to butt in, but most feel this is a reference to the Trinity.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

WaltL1 said:


> Turn away Welder, don't look now but......
> I'm with you on this one.
> I don't think your intention is to try save anybody.
> Your Elect beliefs and trying to save somebody are pretty much the opposite thing.



Well, Dang! Both of ya'll turn away. I agree with both of you.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

NCHillbilly said:


> If only their 5000x great-grandma hadn't talked to that snake.....



You left out part of the post and I'm missing your point because of it.


----------



## NCHillbilly

SemperFiDawg said:


> You left out part of the post and I'm missing your point because of it.



My point is: that is why I've been told all my life that no one is innocent in the eyes of God now-because Eve talked to the snek and disobeyed God because of it, and brought sin into the world- and we are all to still suffer for it and be considered intrinsically evil beings by default-even thousands of years later.


----------



## bullethead

SemperFiDawg said:


> Not to butt in, but most feel this is a reference to the Trinity.



Most modern believers feel that it is the trinity. 
But in all fairness, it is because they got to connect it to the NT.

I am wondering who the writers back 5000 years ago meant,  back when multiple gods were the norm.


----------



## WaltL1

SemperFiDawg said:


> UHHH, to point out the obvious, (and your contradiction) if  they weren't innocent which is exactly what the Bible says about them.
> 
> Plenty of caricatures to go around too it seems


And there, in a nutshell, is the sick side of religion.


----------



## bullethead

NCHillbilly said:


> My point is: that is why I've been told all my life that no one is innocent in the eyes of God now-because Eve talked to the snek and disobeyed God because of it, and brought sin into the world- and we are all to still suffer for it and be considered intrinsically evil beings by default-even thousands of years later.


And god knew she was gonna talk to the snake eons before she did it, heck god made the snake.  And according to some, the snake had to get gods permission to carry out the plot. The while thing was gods doing anyway.

The absurdity doesnt nesh well with a god.


----------



## NCHillbilly

bullethead said:


> And god knew she was gonna talk to the snake eons before she did it, heck god made the snake.  And according to some, the snake had to get gods permission to carry out the plot. The while thing was gods doing anyway.
> 
> The absurdity doesnt nesh well with a god.



I can't figure out how Eve got blamed with bringing sin into the world anyway, when the Devil was already there- put there by God. I doubt if Satan was a good guy back then, either.


----------



## WaltL1

SemperFiDawg said:


> Well, Dang! Both of ya'll turn away. I agree with both of you.


Its a kumbaya moment.


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> SMH  Wow!  Just Wow!



Explain to me how God would eternally separate Himself from someone He loves?
I keep asking this but nobody will address it for me.


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> Explain to me how God would eternally separate Himself from someone He loves?



He doesn't.  People choose to separate themselves from God.


----------



## welderguy

centerpin fan said:


> He doesn't.  People choose to separate themselves from God.



The outcome is the same.
Let me rephrase it to accommodate your beliefs.

How can God allow any that He loves to be separated from Him eternally?


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> How can God allow any that He loves to be separated from Him eternally?



It's that whole "free will" thing.


----------



## welderguy

centerpin fan said:


> It's that whole "free will" thing.



So you're telling me His love is like a water faucet? He can turn it on and off, according to whatever man does?


----------



## bullethead

NCHillbilly said:


> I can't figure out how Eve got blamed with bringing sin into the world anyway, when the Devil was already there- put there by God. I doubt if Satan was a good guy back then, either.



Yeah the whole devil secretly staging a revolt against an omniscient and omnipotent being just doesnt stand out for most believers.

At least welder says it is all god plan. Though sick and twisted that is the only logical conclusion.

Here is the tree of knowledge, but dont eat the fruit or i will punish you, but you will eat the fruit because I will make you and then I will eventually kill eveyone but 8 people on earth for doing so. Then those 8 will continue to sin anyway, so i should have sprung a leak in thier dingy too but the best way to solve it all is to send a version of myself as my son and have him push the right buttons in order that man kills him, but he doesnt really die because he is me.

Worse than any jerry springer episode but the viewers keep tuning in.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> Explain to me how God would eternally separate Himself from someone He loves?
> I keep asking this but nobody will address it for me.


Here's why you don't get it -
YOU believe God shows his love for you by choosing you to love him.
If he loves you and he has chosen you to love him you cannot be separate.
Am I close?


----------



## centerpin fan

bullethead said:


> Worse than any jerry springer episode but the viewers keep tuning in.



Sometimes, you just have to let art flow over you.


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> So you're telling me His love is like a water faucet? He can turn it on and off, according to whatever man does?



I'm telling you that God loves all and offers salvation to all.  Some choose to reject Him.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> So you're telling me His love is like a water faucet? He can turn it on and off, according to whatever man does?


Can't God do anything?
Turning something on and off is probably child's play for him wouldn't you think?


----------



## bullethead

centerpin fan said:


> Sometimes, you just have to let art flow over you.



I used to CP, I used to.


----------



## welderguy

centerpin fan said:


> I'm telling you that God loves all and offers salvation to all.  Some choose to reject Him.



I don't get that at all. In fact, it really just flabbergasts me to no end. 
That is not love at all, if it is conditional. What if not one person ever accepted Him? Wouldn't​ Jesus have suffered in vain? 
It could have happened you know.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> I don't get that at all. In fact, it really just flabbergasts me to no end.
> That is not love at all, if it is conditional. What if not one person ever accepted Him? Wouldn't​ Jesus have suffered in vain?
> It could have happened you know.



Welder, think about it...
If god knows everything he already knows who will accept Jesus, who will reject Jesus,  eho wull initially accept him and then reject him, who will reject him and then accept him.
It is all really a big show and waste of time.
Its like going to Vegas and blowing half of your life savings on a hand of poker and everyone feeling sorry for you and you pretending to feel sorry for yourself but you know with the very next hand that you are going to win and you bet the rest of your life savings and win back all that you've lost plus a few lifetimes more.

It is not a sacrifice when you make the rules and write the script.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Welder, think about it...
> If god knows everything he already knows who will accept Jesus, who will reject Jesus,  eho wull initially accept him and then reject him, who will reject him and then accept him.
> It is all really a big show and waste of time.
> Its like going to Vegas and blowing half of your life savings on a hand of poker and everyone feeling sorry for you and you pretending to feel sorry for yourself but you know with the very next hand that you are going to win and you bet the rest of your life savings and win back all that you've lost plus a few lifetimes more.
> 
> It is not a sacrifice when you make the rules and write the script.



I might could understand that if they said God knew who would accept Him and only those are the ones He loves. But they are saying He loved everyone but stops loving the ones that reject Him.
They don't give scripture to back it up, they don't even give a basic explanation for it. They just say that's how it is.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> I don't get that at all. In fact, it really just flabbergasts me to no end.
> That is not love at all, if it is conditional. What if not one person ever accepted Him? Wouldn't​ Jesus have suffered in vain?
> It could have happened you know.





> What if not one person ever accepted Him?


The Vatican would have went broke instead of stashing billions.


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> I don't get that at all. In fact, it really just flabbergasts me to no end.
> That is not love at all, if it is conditional.



There are lots of conditional statements in the Bible.  Here's one of them:

"If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love ..."

The disciples didn't seem flabbergasted by this.


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> IBut they are saying He loved everyone but stops loving the ones that reject Him.



Who said that?  Not me.


----------



## welderguy

centerpin fan said:


> There are lots of conditional statements in the Bible.  Here's one of them:
> 
> "If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love ..."
> 
> The disciples didn't seem flabbergasted by this.



How would you square this text with Romans 8:35-39?
Do you see it as an exception to it or a confirmation to it?

Romans 8:35-39
35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
36 As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.
37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.
38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.


----------



## welderguy

centerpin fan said:


> Who said that?  Not me.



If they are eternally separated from Him, wouldn't that equate to His ceasing to love them?


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> How would you square this text with Romans 8:35-39?
> Do you see it as an exception to it or a confirmation to it?
> 
> Romans 8:35-39
> 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
> 36 As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.
> 37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.
> 38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
> 39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.


God isn't on that list.
Must mean God can separate you if he wants to.


----------



## NCHillbilly

welderguy said:


> How would you square this text with Romans 8:35-39?
> Do you see it as an exception to it or a confirmation to it?
> 
> Romans 8:35-39
> 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
> 36 As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.
> 37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.
> 38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
> 39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.



Looks to me like you just posted scripture that refutes your position?


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> God isn't on that list.
> Must mean God can separate you if he wants to.



Wouldn't that make God a schizophrenic?

And wouldn't that contradict this?:

Jeremiah 31:3
3 The Lord hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.


----------



## welderguy

NCHillbilly said:


> Looks to me like you just posted scripture that refutes your position?



Not if you consider the whole context of Romans 8.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> I might could understand that if they said God knew who would accept Him and only those are the ones He loves. But they are saying He loved everyone but stops loving the ones that reject Him.
> They don't give scripture to back it up, they don't even give a basic explanation for it. They just say that's how it is.


He sends the ones that reject him to burn for eternity.  Love?


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Wouldn't that make God a schizophrenic?
> 
> And wouldn't that contradict this?:
> 
> Jeremiah 31:3
> 3 The Lord hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.


Whoever wrote these stories certainly portrayed their god as a schizophrenic and those same writers definitely contradict themselves.

Now you are starting to see a little more into what we have noticed long ago.

Don't just read the stuff that fits. Read it all and you will find the contradictions and insanity of it all.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Whoever wrote these stories certainly portrayed their god as a schizophrenic and those same writers definitely contradict themselves.
> 
> Now you are starting to see a little more into what we have noticed long ago.
> 
> Don't just read the stuff that fits. Read it all and you will find the contradictions and insanity of it all.



Scriptures don't contradict themselves. Man does(sometimes).
You missed my point.....again.

I was directing the questions to the believers anyway. (guess I'm in the wrong place for that. sorry....again)


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Scriptures don't contradict themselves. Man does(sometimes).
> You missed my point.....again.
> 
> I was directing the questions to the believers anyway. (guess I'm in the wrong place for that. sorry....again)


If it were not for the ovewhelming evidence otherwise, id believe you.


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> How would you square this text with Romans 8:35-39?
> Do you see it as an exception to it or a confirmation to it?
> 
> Romans 8:35-39
> 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
> 36 As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.
> 37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.
> 38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
> 39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.



I see no contradiction.  There is nothing in Romans 8 saying we can't reject God.


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> If they are eternally separated from Him, wouldn't that equate to His ceasing to love them?



The father never stopped loving the prodigal son.


----------



## Israel

Then I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?" Then I said, "Here am I. Send me!" He said, "Go, and tell this people: 'Keep on listening, but do not perceive; Keep on looking, but do not understand.' "Render the hearts of this people insensitive, Their ears dull, And their eyes dim, Otherwise they might see with their eyes, Hear with their ears, Understand with their hearts, And return and be healed."…


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> Wouldn't that make God a schizophrenic?
> 
> And wouldn't that contradict this?:
> 
> Jeremiah 31:3
> 3 The Lord hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.


Maybe you should take a step back and regroup?
You are quoting scripture and making an argument against God being able to do anything he wants for whatever reason he wants.
Are you sure that's the position you want to take?


----------



## welderguy

centerpin fan said:


> I see no contradiction.  There is nothing in Romans 8 saying we can't reject God.



I don't think you understood what I was asking. In no way was I implying there was contradiction.

But, whether we reject God or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether God rejects those that He loves. I believe Romans 8 assures us that He does not. Ever.


----------



## welderguy

centerpin fan said:


> The father never stopped loving the prodigal son.



My point exactly.
But the son was also never eternally separated from his father either, so I don't think that lesson supports your view very well.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> Maybe you should take a step back and regroup?
> You are quoting scripture and making an argument against God being able to do anything he wants for whatever reason he wants.
> Are you sure that's the position you want to take?



It's not a matter of God doing whatever He wants. It's a matter of Him doing what He promised to do. He never breaks a promise.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> It's not a matter of God doing whatever He wants. It's a matter of Him doing what He promised to do. He never breaks a promise.


A minute ago it was because it would make him look like a schizophrenic.
Now its because he cant break a promise.
Are you just throwing stuff against the wall, Welder?


----------



## bullethead

WaltL1 said:


> A minute ago it was because it would make him look like a schizophrenic.
> Now its because he cant break a promise.
> Are you just throwing stuff against the wall, Welder?



This is what the one called Welder does.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> A minute ago it was because it would make him look like a schizophrenic.
> Now its because he cant break a promise.
> Are you just throwing stuff against the wall, Welder?



Go back and read it again.
The part about schizophrenia was describing CPF's idea of a God who loves a person one day and ceases to love them the next.

The reason this is not true is BECAUSE God does not break His promises.


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> But, whether we reject God or not is irrelevant.



I disagree completely.


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> My point exactly.
> But the son was also never eternally separated from his father either, so I don't think that lesson supports your view very well.



I think the entire NT supports my position.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> This is what the one called Welder does.



Ya'll don't half read what I write.
Then I have to go back and re-explain everything again over and over.


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> The part about schizophrenia was describing CPF's idea of a God who loves a person one day and ceases to love them the next.



Again ... I don't believe that and never said that.  Your theology forces you to believe that's what I think.


----------



## welderguy

centerpin fan said:


> I think the entire NT supports my position.



Let me just make sure I'm understanding your position.

Are you saying that you believe those eternally separated will still be loved by God, even in their separation? And that the entire NT supports this?


----------



## ambush80

NCHillbilly said:


> My point is: that is why I've been told all my life that no one is innocent in the eyes of God now-because Eve talked to the snek and disobeyed God because of it, and brought sin into the world- and we are all to still suffer for it and be considered intrinsically evil beings by default-even thousands of years later.



I made a drawing.


----------



## WaltL1

ambush80 said:


> I made a drawing.


Did you really draw that?
Very artistic apple.


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> Let me just make sure I'm understanding your position.
> 
> Are you saying that you believe those eternally separated will still be loved by God, even in their separation? And that the entire NT supports this?



My position is this:  God wants ALL men to be saved, as 1 Timothy 2:4 plainly says.  

Do you believe God wants ALL men to be saved?


----------



## welderguy

centerpin fan said:


> My position is this:  God wants ALL men to be saved, as 1 Timothy 2:4 plainly says.
> 
> Do you believe God wants ALL men to be saved?



"All", meaning, all manner of men "OUT OF every kindred and tongue and people and nation"
That's who Timothy was being charged to go preach to.

Can you please answer my specific question in my last post?


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> Let me just make sure I'm understanding your position.
> 
> Are you saying that you believe those eternally separated will still be loved by God, even in their separation? And that the entire NT supports this?



Jesus said in Matthew 7:23 "away from Me, I never knew you", so I would say no.


----------



## ambush80

WaltL1 said:


> Did you really draw that?
> Very artistic apple.



I went to art school


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> "All", meaning, all manner of men "OUT OF every kindred and tongue and people and nation"
> That's who Timothy was being charged to go preach to.



Somehow, I knew ALL would not mean ALL.


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> "All", meaning, all manner of men "OUT OF every kindred and tongue and people and nation"
> That's who Timothy was being charged to go preach to.



John 3:16 says, "For God so loved THE WORLD ..."

Do you believe that God loves THE WORLD?


----------



## centerpin fan

ambush80 said:


> I went to art school



I think you were "one and done" -- but not by choice.


----------



## ambush80

https://www.tomboweurope.com/en/products/drawing/brush-pens/

This is currently my favorite thing to draw with.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> "All", meaning, all manner of men "OUT OF every kindred and tongue and people and nation"
> That's who Timothy was being charged to go preach to.
> 
> Can you please answer my specific question in my last post?


So while I hesitate to foray into your "what does it really say" discussion, I have a question -
I just read a whole list of the various translations (see link) and they all start with "all people" or "everyone" or "all men"....
http://biblehub.com/1_timothy/2-4.htm
So my question is -
Does who you are talking to matter if you use all men, everyone, all people etc?
All means All doesn't it? 
If it doesn't mean ALL wouldn't it say "all of you here" or "all of you" or all of you but not them" or something like that?
How about -
I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— 2for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, 6who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time. 7And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a true and faithful teacher of the Gentiles.

The use of the word "mankind" sure seems like a key word to me. Its a pretty inclusive word.


----------



## centerpin fan

welderguy said:


> "All", meaning, all manner of men "OUT OF every kindred and tongue and people and nation"
> That's who Timothy was being charged to go preach to.



If you walked up to a complete stranger (someone with no church or theological training) and showed them 1 Tim. 2:4, do you actually believe they would come up with this same interpretation?

Or would they interpret ALL to be ALL?


----------



## WaltL1

ambush80 said:


> I went to art school


Yeah but a school didn't teach you that.
Do you draw/sketch/paint/whatever a lot?


----------



## ambush80

WaltL1 said:


> Yeah but a school didn't teach you that.
> Do you draw/sketch/paint/whatever a lot?



Get you one of those brush markers.  It's like a distortion pedal for a guitar.

I don't draw or paint too much anymore.  Usually with my daughter.


----------



## WaltL1

ambush80 said:


> Get you one of those brush markers.  It's like a distortion pedal for a guitar.
> 
> I don't draw or paint too much anymore.  Usually with my daughter.


Yes I'm sure one of those markers will vastly improve my stick men drawings


----------



## Artfuldodger

Wouldn't one think though that if Jesus died for everyone then we'd all in some universal way receive salvation? If all means all. If sin entered through one man and left through one man.

Then there's that pesky verse about believing in Jesus. Even if you were born never hearing about him. Even if you were born in a country whose religion is just as faithful as Christianity to your god.

In this way I can see someone being totally depraved to not knowing God/Jesus. Either they have never heard or their own religious indoctrination blinds their knowledge. So perhaps it does take God himself to call. To open their eyes to understanding. To believe in he11 or everlasting death. To believe in an escape from this everlasting death.

How could one fear He11 if he doesn't have the capacity to believe in God? Why would one want or need salvation from a place they don't even believe in? How can one believe in eternal life if they've never heard?  In that respect election can't be based on fear of God. Love can't be based on fear. 

My question to the free will believers would be "how has folks who haven't ever heard the Gospel or who are so indoctrinated by their own religious indoctrination, gonna ever get their eyes to open to the truth?

How are they ever gonna fear he11/eternal death  or stop worshiping the wrong God if the right God himself doesn't enlighten them?

We can send thousands of men to tell them and it's not gonna happen. We can't open their eyes, only God can. So if God truly loves the entire world or just his elect, then he will surely, at the very least, let every one know of his love and of his Son's sacrifice. Every soul would at least need to have heard. This to include all who have died on every island and foreign village.

There can and never could have been a time when salvation was based on anything man was doing. This to include commandment keeping or hearing from another man.
There can and never could have been a time when no man on the face of the earth, that God loved, didn't know the story of his gospel. Even before the story of his gospel happened.

For God so loved the world. The free will way is a terrible answer. It's even more disturbing than the election way. Souls burning in He11 forever because they never heard? Souls burning in He11 forever because they were indoctrinated into the wrong religion?
Dependent on a man to convince them otherwise? Yet the freewill way is fair? I don't think so. 
I'm not saying the election way is more fair but at least it's all in God's hands. God is choosing whom he will lead to his Son. God is opening their eyes. God has taught them the gospel even before it happened. God is giving them his love and not removing it. It's fair because salvation is from him and it's his choosing. His rules, his game. 

Did I mention that God is omniscient? So even if one thinks God looked ahead and became a respecter of man and elected based on who chose him, then this means we still can't have the free will to change what God has already seen based on his foreknowledge.
He has already seen it. It's already a done deal. Nothing you can do about it now. You can't change to a believer now, because God already knew you wouldn't. It's the same as not really having a choice. Maybe it makes one feel better if they think they had a choice.


----------



## ambush80

waltl1 said:


> yes i'm sure one of those markers will vastly improve my stick men drawings



...:d:d


----------



## Israel

drawing can be a fine discipline...it can force you to see things


----------



## Artfuldodger

centerpin fan said:


> There are lots of conditional statements in the Bible.  Here's one of them:
> 
> "If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love ..."
> 
> The disciples didn't seem flabbergasted by this.



Do you see commandment keeping as a stipulation for salvation? If so did one also have to believe in Jesus before Jesus came to earth as a man?


----------



## SemperFiDawg

NCHillbilly said:


> My point is: that is why I've been told all my life that no one is innocent in the eyes of God now-because Eve talked to the snek and disobeyed God because of it, and brought sin into the world- and we are all to still suffer for it and be considered intrinsically evil beings by default-even thousands of years later.



Maybe, maybe not.  There's a couple different trains of thought on that original sin.  I don't worry about others sins.  Mine were and are bad enough.  

The text says they were NOT INNOCENT.  They were so bad, unredeemable, and had to be destroyed.  We can speculate about the hows and whys till the cows come home.


----------



## bullethead

20+ million people all so bad worldwide that they have been sentenced to drown and god contacts Noah to tell a handful just in a small few miles in the middle east that they need to wise up. Noah tells them but they do not listen and we know the rest of the story..
What kind of designer makes such rogue designs that he has to constantly keep killing them in suffering ways, and does it full well knowing they will be absolute failures at meeting his requirements before he even makes the first one?
And more importantly psychopathish noteworthy, keeps doing it over and over and over.....


----------



## centerpin fan

ArtfulDodger:

We are saved by grace through faith.  Jesus' shed blood covers our sins, not the blood of goats and bulls.

Having said that, I think it was SFD in another thread who made the point that the Ten Commandments are still a thing.  Just because you "walked the aisle" or raised your hand or said a prayer, that doesn't give you license to sin.

"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord' will enter the kingdom, but only he who does the will of the Father."


----------



## bullethead

centerpin fan said:


> ArtfulDodger:
> 
> We are saved by grace through faith.  Jesus' shed blood covers our sins, not the blood of goats and bulls.
> 
> Having said that, I think it was SFD in another thread who made the point that the Ten Commandments are still a thing.  Just because you "walked the aisle" or raised your hand or said a prayer, that doesn't give you license to sin.
> 
> "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord' will enter the kingdom, but only he who does the will of the Father."


So when exactly is it ok to use OT stuff and when is it ok to say that the OT stuff doesn't apply?


----------



## centerpin fan

bullethead said:


> So when exactly is it ok to use OT stuff and when is it ok to say that the OT stuff doesn't apply?



Acts 15 deals with this question.  

Traveling today, so that's all I have time for now.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

bullethead said:


> And god knew she was gonna talk to the snake eons before she did it, heck god made the snake.  And according to some, the snake had to get gods permission to carry out the plot. The while thing was gods doing anyway.
> 
> The absurdity doesnt nesh well with a god.



Actually it wasn't a snek, or snake. It was a serpent and was a different critter than what we refer to as a "snek", but somewhere along the line man felt the need to portray it as a snek in bible illustrations and the poor snakes have paid the price ever since by people being inherently afraid of them. 

Heck even some stupid Christians have paid the price by taking up venomous snakes and handling them. If they only understood the root meaning of what a serpant really is, and that it no longer exist on earth (that we know of) they could have saved themselves a lot of grief and many "Hey ya'll watch this" moments by doing stupid things in failed attempts to prove their faith, which in reality was doing nothing more than just stupid things.


----------



## bullethead

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Actually it wasn't a snek, or snake. It was a serpent and was a different critter than what we refer to as a "snek", but somewhere along the line man felt the need to portray it as a snek in bible illustrations and the poor snakes have paid the price ever since by people being inherently afraid of them.
> 
> Heck even some stupid Christians have paid the price by taking up venomous snakes and handling them. If they only understood the root meaning of what a serpant really is, and that it no longer exist on earth (that we know of) they could have saved themselves a lot of grief and many "Hey ya'll watch this" moments by doing stupid things in failed attempts to prove their faith, which in reality was doing nothing more than just stupid things.


Does the type of creature really matter? Serpent, frog, butterfly?
Isn't the real story that god knew Satan was going to tempt Eve and that god knew Eve was going to fall for it long before god created all of them?


----------



## bullethead

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Actually it wasn't a snek, or snake. It was a serpent and was a different critter than what we refer to as a "snek", but somewhere along the line man felt the need to portray it as a snek in bible illustrations and the poor snakes have paid the price ever since by people being inherently afraid of them.
> 
> Heck even some stupid Christians have paid the price by taking up venomous snakes and handling them. If they only understood the root meaning of what a serpant really is, and that it no longer exist on earth (that we know of) they could have saved themselves a lot of grief and many "Hey ya'll watch this" moments by doing stupid things in failed attempts to prove their faith, which in reality was doing nothing more than just stupid things.


And now that you have got me extremely curious, what is a serpent and how does it differ from a snake?
What species was it that it no longer exists? And how do we know?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

bullethead said:


> Does the type of creature really matter? Serpent, frog, butterfly?
> Isn't the real story that god knew Satan was going to tempt Eve and that god knew Eve was going to fall for it long before god created all of them?



That would be an argument for predestination and against free will. Are we really going to morph this discussion in that direction?


----------



## ambush80

bullethead said:


> And now that you have got me extremely curious, what is a serpent and how does it differ from a snake?
> What species was it that it no longer exists? And how do we know?



It was snek.  Fear of snek is deeply rooted.  That's why it is so powerful as an allegorical device.  Many cultures use it to scare people (if they have snek around).  Watch how people jump at a coil of rope in a dim room.  That's our monkey ancestry manifested.



Miguel Cervantes said:


> That would be an argument for predestination and against free will. Are we really going to morph this discussion in that direction?




Yes please.  I would like to see some freewillies reconcile free will with omniscience.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> It was snek.  Fear of snek is deeply rooted.  That's why it is so powerful as an allegorical device.  Many cultures use it to scare people.  Watch how people jump at a coil of rope in a dim room.  That's our monkey ancestry manifested.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes please.  I would like to see some freewillies reconcile free will with omniscience.



It really isn't that difficult if you've ever raised a child.


----------



## ambush80

Israel said:


> drawing can be a fine discipline...it can force you to see things



It's a lie that tells the truth.


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> It really isn't that difficult if you've ever raised a child.



I've got an 8 year old.  Either God knows what she's gonna do or He doesn't.  Why wouldn't He?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> I've got an 8 year old.  Either God knows what she's gonna do or He doesn't.  Why wouldn't He?



You are looking at it wrong. 

God is the keeper of his flock.

You are the keeper of yours. 

How many times have to tried, through personal life experience and gained wisdom, to tell that 8 year old not to do something that you know could potentially harm them? Knowing full well they will most likely attempt or do it anyway?


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> You are looking at it wrong.
> 
> God is the keeper of his flock.
> 
> You are the keeper of yours.
> 
> How many times have to tried, through personal life experience and gained wisdom, to tell that 8 year old not to do something that you know could potentially harm them? Knowing full well they will most likely attempt or do it anyway?



How do you square omniscience with freewill?


----------



## Israel

ambush80 said:


> How do you square omniscience with freewill?



Please don't neglect omnipotence. You see?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> How do you square omniscience with freewill?



I just explained a more human version to you. Are you not knowledgeable to understand it?


----------



## ambush80

Israel said:


> Please don't neglect omnipotence. You see?



Does all powerful mean he can make a burrito so hot that he can't eat it?


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I just explained a more human version to you. Are you not knowledgeable to understand it?



I don't have omniscience or omnipotence, nor does the father in your example.

Explain how if a being with those qualities exists, freewill can exist simultaneously.


----------



## welderguy

Miguel Cervantes said:


> You are looking at it wrong.
> 
> God is the keeper of his flock.
> 
> You are the keeper of yours.
> 
> How many times have to tried, through personal life experience and gained wisdom, to tell that 8 year old not to do something that you know could potentially harm them? Knowing full well they will most likely attempt or do it anyway?



Miguel, look at this text.

Philippians 2:13
13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.


You just admitted that you cannot be sure your child will do what you want him to do. 

God can. He changes the will.


----------



## Israel




----------



## Israel

ambush80 said:


> Does all powerful mean he can make a burrito so hot that he can't eat it?



He can redefine burrito so that it is interstellar, while also being a tasty TV snack.


----------



## ambush80

Israel said:


> He can redefine burrito so that it is interstellar, while also being a tasty TV snack.



Now you're talking like Jesus.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

bullethead said:


> Most modern believers feel that it is the trinity.
> But in all fairness, it is because they got to connect it to the NT.
> 
> I am wondering who the writers back 5000 years ago meant,  back when multiple gods were the norm.



The writer was the Holy Spirit so I think THEY got it right.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

WaltL1 said:


> And there, in a nutshell, is the sick side of religion.



Actually, that, in a nutshell, is how to misconstrue a quote.  The original was post #350.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

centerpin fan said:


> he doesn't.  People choose to separate themselves from god.



zackly!!


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> zackly!!



Once again.

Philippians 2:13
13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

God is the great overrider of our so called "choices".
He changes our will. How free is that?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> Now you're talking like Jesus.



So you've actually heard Jesus?


----------



## SemperFiDawg

ambush80 said:


> I made a drawing.



I like it.  It's got that "something".


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> So you've actually heard Jesus?



It's the obfuscating style.


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> I like it.  It's got that "something".



"Je ne sais quoi"?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

welderguy said:


> Once again.
> 
> Philippians 2:13
> 13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
> 
> God is the great overrider of our so called "choices".
> He changes our will. How free is that?



So you are exerting a 100% predestination doctrine void of any of the free will mentioned in Genesis and countless other examples in the Bible?

Is it your impression that God has ordained you to pummel us with this predestination doctrine via pick and choose Scripture void of historical or anthropological context based on who Paul was preaching to at the time of his messages?

Omniscience, nor Omnipotent has a context of oppressive control over anyone. It deals merely with knowledge, not predestination or the control over, even if the outcome is known. God may fully well know exactly what you will do after your next breath, should you choose to exercise that option, or he may choose to intervene. It is His option. Just as with my child, once I have cautioned them not to choose option b over option a. But sometimes you have to let humans learn the hard way. 

I think I'll go have an apple for a snack. Be right back.


----------



## bullethead

Miguel Cervantes said:


> That would be an argument for predestination and against free will. Are we really going to morph this discussion in that direction?



Well yeah because predestination/free will has been a part of the thread so far.
I mean lets face it...is there anyone that disagrees that god knows everything that is going to happen before it happens?
And if anyone agrees that god is omniscient and omnipotent who would like to share why god keeps making flawed creatures that he knows are flawed before he makes them and keeps wiping them out while trying to continually trying to figure out ways on how to save them.. please share your thoughts.

But, what type of serpent was prevalent in that area 6000 years ago that is extinct now? And why does it matter which creature tempted eve?

Miguel, is it out of line to think that god knew Eve would be tempted and fail the test long before Eve was created?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

bullethead said:


> Well yeah because predestination/free will has been a part of the thread so far.
> I mean lets face it...is there anyone that disagrees that god knows everything that is going to happen before it happens?
> And if anyone agrees that god is omniscient and omnipotent who would like to share why god keeps making flawed creatures that he knows are flawed before he makes them and keeps wiping them out while trying to continually trying to figure out ways on how to save them.. please share your thoughts.
> 
> But, what type of serpent was prevalent in that area 6000 years ago that is extinct now? And why does it matter which creature tempted eve?
> 
> Miguel, is it out of line to think that god knew Eve would be tempted and fail the test long before Eve was created?



Have I ever claimed the earth is only 6000 years old?


----------



## bullethead

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Have I ever claimed the earth is only 6000 years old?



No. You have not. You have opened up a new line of potential information and I am eager to learn.
And I can't help but notice that you picked out the easiest and most non important question to answer and avoided the ones that i was honestly interested in getting answers to so that I can research them further.

But I am now interested in this serpent. What species and kind was it? I am curious to when it existed and when it went extinct.

Please continue with your timeline on when humans that looked like Adam and Eve were created and how this lines up with what is currently considered to be early humans to modern humans.

Honest, I am extremely interested in hearing your thoughts and research on these matters. I am intrigued.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

bullethead said:


> No. You have not. You have opened up a new line of potential information and I am eager to learn.
> And I can't help but notice that you picked out the easiest and most non important question to answer and avoided the ones that i was honestly interested in getting answers to so that I can research them further.
> 
> But I am now interested in this serpent. What species and kind was it? I am curious to when it existed and when it went extinct.
> 
> Please continue with your timeline on when humans that looked like Adam and Eve were created and how this lines up with what is currently considered to be early humans to modern humans.
> 
> Honest, I am extremely interested in hearing your thoughts and research on these matters. I am intrigued.


Well, unless you're gonna pay me a considerable sum of money, you'll have to wait. Work calls.


----------



## bullethead

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Well, unless you're gonna pay me a considerable sum of money, you'll have to wait. Work calls.



Hmmm


----------



## welderguy

Miguel Cervantes said:


> So you are exerting a 100% predestination doctrine void of any of the free will mentioned in Genesis and countless other examples in the Bible?
> 
> Is it your impression that God has ordained you to pummel us with this predestination doctrine via pick and choose Scripture void of historical or anthropological context based on who Paul was preaching to at the time of his messages?
> 
> Omniscience, nor Omnipotent has a context of oppressive control over anyone. It deals merely with knowledge, not predestination or the control over, even if the outcome is known. God may fully well know exactly what you will do after your next breath, should you choose to exercise that option, or he may choose to intervene. It is His option. Just as with my child, once I have cautioned them not to choose option b over option a. But sometimes you have to let humans learn the hard way.
> 
> I think I'll go have an apple for a snack. Be right back.



When you get done with your apple and work, I'd like to hear about all this "freewill in Genesis and countless other examples in the Bible."
Especially how any so called freewill can override God's purposes.

I know this struggle you have with this, because I once struggled with it also. But God used some good brothers to pull me out of that fire though.


----------



## 660griz

welderguy said:


> Especially how any so called freewill can override God's purposes.



True.
Does this also mean you do not pray?


----------



## welderguy

660griz said:


> True.
> Does this also mean you do not pray?



I do pray.
Does that mean God didn't move me to pray? If my will was to pray, He worked that will in me for His purpose.


----------



## 660griz

welderguy said:


> I do pray.
> Does that mean God didn't move me to pray? If my will was to pray, He worked that will in me for His purpose.




Hmmmm.
So if someone gets sick. It is God's will. Then, he moves you to pray for them so they will get better? All part of his plan?
Isn't God going to do what he wants anyway?


----------



## welderguy

660griz said:


> Hmmmm.
> So if someone gets sick. It is God's will. Then, he moves you to pray for them so they will get better? All part of his plan?
> Isn't God going to do what he wants anyway?



You catch on fast.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

ambush80 said:


> "Je ne sais quoi"?



Only drink that when I can get it, usually in Mexico.


----------



## NCHillbilly

ambush80 said:


> I made a drawing.



 



Miguel Cervantes said:


> Actually it wasn't a snek, or snake. It was a serpent and was a different critter than what we refer to as a "snek", but somewhere along the line man felt the need to portray it as a snek in bible illustrations and the poor snakes have paid the price ever since by people being inherently afraid of them.
> 
> Heck even some stupid Christians have paid the price by taking up venomous snakes and handling them. If they only understood the root meaning of what a serpant really is, and that it no longer exist on earth (that we know of) they could have saved themselves a lot of grief and many "Hey ya'll watch this" moments by doing stupid things in failed attempts to prove their faith, which in reality was doing nothing more than just stupid things.



Nah, it was regular ol' snek. Sounds like snek to me:



> _14The LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, Cursed are you more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field; On your belly you will go, And dust you will eat All the days of your life;
> 
> 15And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel." _



I wonder if sneks had legs back then, if they didn't already "go on their bellies?"

One of those snek preachers here where I live got his heel bruised good by a big timber rattler several years ago during a service. Actually, I think it was really his hand or arm that got bruised. Anyway, he is now in a position to know the truth of all this much better than any of us living folk.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

660griz said:


> True.
> Does this also mean you do not pray?



Don't need to dude.  He's (and you have to say this in a hushed voice of awed reverence) "Chosen"


----------



## 660griz

welderguy said:


> You catch on fast.



Well, I am sure glad I don't worship such a God.


----------



## 660griz

SemperFiDawg said:


> Don't need to dude.  He's (and you have to say this in a hushed voice of awed reverence) "Chosen"




Is 'touched' the same?


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> Don't need to dude.  He's (and you have to say this in a hushed voice of awed reverence) "Chosen"



I almost took offense to that comment.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> When you get done with your apple and work, I'd like to hear about all this "freewill in Genesis and countless other examples in the Bible."
> Especially how any so called freewill can override God's purposes.
> 
> I know this struggle you have with this, because I once struggled with it also. But God used some good brothers to pull me out of that fire though.



......and right into the pan.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> I almost took offense to that comment.



You can't.  That's a voluntary action.


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> ......and right into the pan.



through the strait gate


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> You can't.  That's a voluntary action.



I was initially moved to lash out in anger, but God stopped me and turned my will into peace and love. Praise God!


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> I was initially moved to lash out in anger, but God stopped me and turned my will into peace and love. Praise God!



That's probably true, but if he hadn't you would have moved on your own which is free will.


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> So you are exerting a 100% predestination doctrine void of any of the free will mentioned in Genesis and countless other examples in the Bible?
> 
> Is it your impression that God has ordained you to pummel us with this predestination doctrine via pick and choose Scripture void of historical or anthropological context based on who Paul was preaching to at the time of his messages?
> 
> Omniscience, nor Omnipotent has a context of oppressive control over anyone. It deals merely with knowledge, not predestination or the control over, even if the outcome is known. God may fully well know exactly what you will do after your next breath, should you choose to exercise that option, or he may choose to intervene. It is His option. Just as with my child, once I have cautioned them not to choose option b over option a. But sometimes you have to let humans learn the hard way.
> 
> I think I'll go have an apple for a snack. Be right back.



The issue of freewill being incompatible with omniscience is a philosophical one.  It doesn't have anything to do with power or omniscience.  

"He may choose to intervene"

When did he do this?  Ten thousand years ago?  A millennium ago? Forever ago?  You see the problem with claiming the existence of an eternal being and then talking about it making choices, don't you?


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> That's probably true, but if he hadn't you would have moved on your own which is free will.




It seems like freewill to you but in God's eyes it already was......for eternity.

You guys wanna believe in an omniscient being?  Well, freewill can't exist at the same time.  Better figure out a way to mind job yourself around it.  Or you can always "lay it at the foot of the cross".  That's what folk do when they can't figger' it out with their Earthly noggins.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

ambush80 said:


> The issue of freewill being incompatible with omniscience is a philosophical one.  It doesn't have anything to do with power or omniscience.
> 
> "He may choose to intervene"
> 
> When did he do this?  Ten thousand years ago?  A millennium ago? Forever ago?  You see the problem with claiming the existence of an eternal being and then talking about it making choices, don't you?



Personally I don't see how free will and Gods omniscience are imcompatible or am I misunderstanding your post.


----------



## Israel

Is it Thursday "in the heavens?" Is this afternoon   still "in the future?"


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> That's probably true, but if he hadn't you would have moved on your own which is free will.



I believe Satan was moving me first(by God's permission), but God gave grace that my faith did not fail(in this case).

Same way it happened to Peter. Jesus told Peter Satan desires to sift you as wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith fail not.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

ambush80 said:


> It seems like freewill to you but in God's eyes it already was......for eternity.
> 
> You guys wanna believe in an omniscient being?  Well, freewill can't exist at the same time.  Better figure out a way to mind job yourself around it.  Or you can always "lay it at the foot of the cross".  That's what folk do when they can't figger' it out with their Earthly noggins.



This is why we can't have nice things in the AAA forum. Give you a compliment on your artistic ability and you return a sarcastic comment.  Tisk, Tisk, Tisk


----------



## 660griz

SemperFiDawg said:


> Personally I don't see how free will and Gods omniscience are imcompatible or am I misunderstanding your post.



I don't either. Although, I understand both sides of the argument. I have to go with omniscience being compatible with free will. 
God just knows your choice. God doesn't change it. 
If I put down a piece of bacon and a cabbage. I know my dog is going for the bacon and probably pee on the cabbage.
I didn't tell him which one to choose but, I knew.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

bullethead said:


> Well yeah because predestination/free will has been a part of the thread so far.
> I mean lets face it...is there anyone that disagrees that god knows everything that is going to happen before it happens?


 I would never disagree with that, but just because he knows it will happen does not mean he chooses to intervene. God is not a tyrannical leader and does not bend every humans breath and action to the whim of his will. Were he to do so we wouldn't be having these conversations, now would we?





bullethead said:


> But, what type of serpent was prevalent in that area 6000 years ago that is extinct now? And why does it matter which creature tempted eve?


 I suppose I have to answer two questions with this one. Regarding the 6000 years, proponents of this modern day theory use the chronology of the bible from the beginning in Genesis taken from Hebrew/Jewish texts. The problem with such is they are ignoring what a Jewish Calendar considered a "year" back in early times. The Jews used a Solar Calendar, contrary to our modern day astronomical calendar which wasn't instituted until the 4th century AD. The biblical jewish day was also different from todays astronomical day that begins at Midnight. 

For me, I couldn't care less how old the earth is. It is completely irrelevant to anything instructed in the New Testament for us and how to live our lives.

The serpent? Why on earth would God bother to curse it from the time of presenting the temptation on for the rest of it's life to crawl on it's belly if it didn't before that do so?



bullethead said:


> Miguel, is it out of line to think that god knew Eve would be tempted and fail the test long before Eve was created?


Again, we are addressing the free will aspect of our design. We were created in His/Their image. Are you speculating God does not have free will and did not program that into our being? Returning to my first answer above, we are free to choose to worship him or not. If we did not have that free will, then once again, we would not be having this conversation now, would we?

Now, I've got my supplies from the big orange box store, so back off to work we go, or I go.......or all of us go. I choose to freely do this. Nobody is making me, even if they knew in advance I would.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> I believe Satan was moving me first(by God's permission), but God gave grace that my faith did not fail(in this case).



Are you kidding me or is this really how you see it.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

660griz said:


> I don't either. Although, I understand both sides of the argument. I have to go with omniscience being compatible with free will.
> God just knows your choice. God doesn't change it.



That's how I see it.


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> ......and right into the pan.



That's right.  He obviously doesn't understand omniscience. Ironically, in a similar way to you.


----------



## NCHillbilly

Miguel Cervantes said:


> The serpent? Why on earth would God bother to curse it from the time of presenting the temptation on for the rest of it's life to crawl on it's belly if it didn't before that do so?



So the serpent was the original prototype snek, only with legs installed?


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> This is why we can't have nice things in the AAA forum. Give you a compliment on your artistic ability and you return a sarcastic comment.  Tisk, Tisk, Tisk



Thank you for your compliment.

I wasn't being sarcastic and I'll explain in answering Griz.



660griz said:


> I don't either. Although, I understand both sides of the argument. I have to go with omniscience being compatible with free will.
> God just knows your choice. God doesn't change it.
> If I put down a piece of bacon and a cabbage. I know my dog is going for the bacon and probably pee on the cabbage.
> I didn't tell him which one to choose but, I knew.



Your knowledge of what a dog might do isn't even CLOSE to omniscience: "The state of knowing everything".  Your dog might eat the cabbage for some strange reason and you would be surprised.  An omniscient being can't be 'surprised' by anything.  It knows everything.  

Omniscience is a word like Infinite or Eternal that we don't have any practical knowledge about.  They exist as ideas; in the imagination.  But if you grant they exist then certain truths will result. One of the byproducts of Omniscience is the absence of freewill.  

Everything is known. There are no surprises.


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> Are you kidding me or is this really how you see it.



Yeah. Bad choice of words. Let me amend that to:
Satan was TEMPTING me initially ( by God's permission), but God gave me grace that my faith would fail not.


----------



## 660griz

ambush80 said:


> Thank you for your compliment.
> 
> I wasn't being sarcastic and I'll explain in answering Griz.
> 
> 
> 
> Your knowledge of what a dog might do isn't even CLOSE to omniscience: "The state of knowing everything".  Your dog might eat the cabbage for some strange reason and you would be surprised.  An omniscient being can't be 'surprised' by anything.  It knows everything.
> 
> Omniscience is a word like Infinite or Eternal that we don't have any practical knowledge about.  They exist as ideas; in the imagination.  But if you grant they exist then certain truths will result. One of the byproducts of Omniscience is the absence of freewill.
> 
> Everything is known. There are no surprises.



Nope. Cause I know my dog. Not as good as God knows man kind though. Everything is known and there are no surprises to God. People that think they know you maybe. 
Course, I don't believe in Omniscience, God, or free will so...


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

NCHillbilly said:


> So the serpent was the original prototype snek, only with legs installed?



Which I am fine with, but did He have to go and put that curse on women, making them so grumbly and ornery once a month? Us men folk have to pay an intolerable price for that curse.


----------



## NCHillbilly

welderguy said:


> Yeah. Bad choice of words. Let me amend that to:
> Satan was TEMPTING me initially ( by God's permission), but God gave me grace that my faith would fail not.



So, let me get this straight:

God watches you 24/7, and is greatly concerned with all the mundane details in your life. So does/is Satan.

God notices that you are typing on an internet forum, and thinks that this is important enough of a situation to warrant his intervention. 

So, he calls up Satan, and says, "one of my chosen loved ones, Welderguy, is typing on an internet forum."

Satan says, "Tell me about it! I was already sitting here watching him, wishing that I could afflict him with temptation to type hurtful things to that other feller."

God says, "O.K., go ahead. That other feller believes in free will, anyway, which is insulting unto my omnipotence."

Satan says, "Thanks!" Then he begins to afflict you with the temptation to type hurtful things, and suddenly, you have an urge to be offended at  SFD and lash out in anger at him. 

God says, "this won't do," and he sneaks down there and injects you with about 30ccs of grace. Suddenly, you are filled with peace, love, and faith and don't type hurtful things to SFD.

God then calls up Satan again and says, "hahaha, you lose again!"

Satan says, "Yeah, whatever, why am I not surprised?" And then he goes off somewhere else to try to cause somebody standing in a gas station to steal a Snickers bar. That feller isn't a chosen one, so he's probably gonna wind up in jail.

This is how you really see things happening in your life day-to-day?


----------



## welderguy

NCHillbilly said:


> So, let me get this straight:
> 
> God watches you 24/7, and is greatly concerned with all the mundane details in your life. So does/is Satan.
> 
> God notices that you are typing on an internet forum, and thinks that this is important enough of a situation to warrant his intervention.
> 
> So, he calls up Satan, and says, "one of my chosen loved ones, Welderguy, is typing on an internet forum."
> 
> Satan says, "Tell me about it! I was already sitting here watching him, wishing that I could afflict him with temptation to type hurtful things to that other feller."
> 
> God says, "O.K., go ahead. That other feller believes in free will, anyway, which is insulting unto my omnipotence."
> 
> Satan says, "Thanks!" Then he begins to afflict you with the temptation to type hurtful things, and suddenly, you have an urge to be offended at  SFD and lash out in anger at him.
> 
> God says, "this won't do," and he sneaks down there and injects you with about 30ccs of grace. Suddenly, you are filled with peace, love, and faith and don't type hurtful things to SFD.
> 
> God then calls up Satan again and says, "hahaha, you lose again!"
> 
> Satan says, "Yeah, whatever, why am I not surprised?" And then he goes off somewhere else to try to cause somebody standing in a gas station to steal a Snickers bar. That feller isn't a chosen one, so he's probably gonna wind up in jail.
> 
> This is how you really see things happening in your life day-to-day?



Without the over-dramatization, that's pretty close according to Job 1. 
The Bible speaks of a spiritual warfare that we cannot see. It's just as real as the things we can see. We even have armor for defense against it.


----------



## NCHillbilly

K..


----------



## bullethead

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I would never disagree with that, but just because he knows it will happen does not mean he chooses to intervene. God is not a tyrannical leader and does not bend every humans breath and action to the whim of his will. Were he to do so we wouldn't be having these conversations, now would we?


But the bible has instances where he is tyrannical and does bend humans breath to the whim of his will.
Pharoah for example





Miguel Cervantes said:


> I suppose I have to answer two questions with this one. Regarding the 6000 years, proponents of this modern day theory use the chronology of the bible from the beginning in Genesis taken from Hebrew/Jewish texts. The problem with such is they are ignoring what a Jewish Calendar considered a "year" back in early times. The Jews used a Solar Calendar, contrary to our modern day astronomical calendar which wasn't instituted until the 4th century AD. The biblical jewish day was also different from todays astronomical day that begins at Midnight.
> 
> For me, I couldn't care less how old the earth is. It is completely irrelevant to anything instructed in the New Testament for us and how to live our lives.


Id just like to know where you think Adam and Eve fit in to the chronological order of human ancestors, early humans and modern humans.



Miguel Cervantes said:


> The serpent? Why on earth would God bother to curse it from the time of presenting the temptation on for the rest of it's life to crawl on it's belly if it didn't before that do so?


Ok so what was it that once walked and instantly crawled? Was it one of a kind? And was that then the beginning of all snakes? 
Why would God forever curse a reptile species for the Devil overtaking it?
Why would God curse it at all for it doing its part in Gods plan?
Did Satan really suffer at all in this curse?




Miguel Cervantes said:


> Again, we are addressing the free will aspect of our design. We were created in His/Their image. Are you speculating God does not have free will and did not program that into our being? Returning to my first answer above, we are free to choose to worship him or not. If we did not have that free will, then once again, we would not be having this conversation now, would we?


So if "their" means trinity then is the Holy Spirit God/Jesus/Humanesqe looking too?
And since they are all spirits are you saying that they are in human form also as we are?
I am speculating that this god seems content to to know his own mistakes and let them play out all the while he dishes out punisment to those who make the mistakes that he knew was going to happen. It is on a much higher scale than a parent/child level.

But really do we have free will if our actions and choices are known to god before we ever do them?
In essence he knows who is gonna be naughty and who is gonna be nice before they are even conceived so why pretend that he wants to sit back and let the hoopla play out.  He already knows the outcome. 





Miguel Cervantes said:


> Now, I've got my supplies from the big orange box store, so back off to work we go, or I go.......or all of us go. I choose to freely do this. Nobody is making me, even if they knew in advance I would.


Or so you hope....


----------



## bullethead

NCHillbilly said:


> So, let me get this straight:
> 
> God watches you 24/7, and is greatly concerned with all the mundane details in your life. So does/is Satan.
> 
> God notices that you are typing on an internet forum, and thinks that this is important enough of a situation to warrant his intervention.
> 
> So, he calls up Satan, and says, "one of my chosen loved ones, Welderguy, is typing on an internet forum."
> 
> Satan says, "Tell me about it! I was already sitting here watching him, wishing that I could afflict him with temptation to type hurtful things to that other feller."
> 
> God says, "O.K., go ahead. That other feller believes in free will, anyway, which is insulting unto my omnipotence."
> 
> Satan says, "Thanks!" Then he begins to afflict you with the temptation to type hurtful things, and suddenly, you have an urge to be offended at  SFD and lash out in anger at him.
> 
> God says, "this won't do," and he sneaks down there and injects you with about 30ccs of grace. Suddenly, you are filled with peace, love, and faith and don't type hurtful things to SFD.
> 
> God then calls up Satan again and says, "hahaha, you lose again!"
> 
> Satan says, "Yeah, whatever, why am I not surprised?" And then he goes off somewhere else to try to cause somebody standing in a gas station to steal a Snickers bar. That feller isn't a chosen one, so he's probably gonna wind up in jail.
> 
> This is how you really see things happening in your life day-to-day?


When out into situations that are routine and daily the romance of thinking that a god and devil actually care is greatly diminished. The grand stories in the bible are what keep people in pews.  The god and devil only care when it is needed.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Without the over-dramatization, that's pretty close according to Job 1.
> The Bible speaks of a spiritual warfare that we cannot see. It's just as real as the things we can see. We even have armor for defense against it.


Spiritual warfare?
Who is really battling and why???


----------



## SemperFiDawg

ambush80 said:


> Thank you for your compliment.
> 
> I wasn't being sarcastic and I'll explain in answering Griz.
> 
> 
> 
> Your knowledge of what a dog might do isn't even CLOSE to omniscience: "The state of knowing everything".  Your dog might eat the cabbage for some strange reason and you would be surprised.  An omniscient being can't be 'surprised' by anything.  It knows everything.
> 
> Omniscience is a word like Infinite or Eternal that we don't have any practical knowledge about.  They exist as ideas; in the imagination.  But if you grant they exist then certain truths will result. One of the byproducts of Omniscience is the absence of freewill.
> 
> Everything is known. There are no surprises.



Sorry brother but that still didn't help me to see why all knowing nullifies free will


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> Yeah. Bad choice of words. Let me amend that to:
> Satan was TEMPTING me initially ( by God's permission), but God gave me grace that my faith would fail not.



So if you do good it was God making, if you do bad it's Satans albeit with Gods permission?  Friend, do you know how twisted that sounds.  It makes God guilty of your sin either by commission or omission.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

660griz said:


> Nope. Cause I know my dog. Not as good as God knows man kind though. Everything is known and there are no surprises to God. People that think they know you maybe.
> Course, I don't believe in Omniscience, God, or free will so...



Your last statement really surprised me.  If you don't believe in free will you almost have to either believe in God (someone programmed you as a automaton) or either action you make is instinct with no thought nor choice.  What am I missing?


----------



## SemperFiDawg

NCHillbilly said:


> So, let me get this straight:
> 
> God watches you 24/7, and is greatly concerned with all the mundane details in your life. So does/is Satan.
> 
> God notices that you are typing on an internet forum, and thinks that this is important enough of a situation to warrant his intervention.
> 
> So, he calls up Satan, and says, "one of my chosen loved ones, Welderguy, is typing on an internet forum."
> 
> Satan says, "Tell me about it! I was already sitting here watching him, wishing that I could afflict him with temptation to type hurtful things to that other feller."
> 
> God says, "O.K., go ahead. That other feller believes in free will, anyway, which is insulting unto my omnipotence."
> 
> Satan says, "Thanks!" Then he begins to afflict you with the temptation to type hurtful things, and suddenly, you have an urge to be offended at  SFD and lash out in anger at him.
> 
> God says, "this won't do," and he sneaks down there and injects you with about 30ccs of grace. Suddenly, you are filled with peace, love, and faith and don't type hurtful things to SFD.
> 
> God then calls up Satan again and says, "hahaha, you lose again!"
> 
> Satan says, "Yeah, whatever, why am I not surprised?" And then he goes off somewhere else to try to cause somebody standing in a gas station to steal a Snickers bar. That feller isn't a chosen one, so he's probably gonna wind up in jail.
> 
> This is how you really see things happening in your life day-to-day?



Man that was beautiful.


----------



## NCHillbilly

SemperFiDawg said:


> Man that was beautiful.



I can't draw purty apples, so I have to write sensationalized dialogue.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Spiritual warfare?
> Who is really battling and why???



I can't tell you the "why" of it, except that God ordained it to be so for His purpose.

The "who" is Satan, his demons, the holy angels, and us.


----------



## ambush80

660griz said:


> Nope. Cause I know my dog. Not as good as God knows man kind though. Everything is known and there are no surprises to God. People that think they know you maybe.
> Course, I don't believe in Omniscience, God, or free will so...



I don't care whether or not omniscience exists, or omnipotence or infinity.  It only matters to those guys that want to believe in an omniscient, omnipotent, infinite being.  That's their conundrum to resolve.


----------



## WaltL1

SemperFiDawg said:


> So if you do good it was God making, if you do bad it's Satans albeit with Gods permission?  Friend, do you know how twisted that sounds.  It makes God guilty of your sin either by commission or omission.


Now you are catching on.
When/If you get to the point you can examine your own beliefs with that same critical eye "you will have arrived".


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> So if you do good it was God making, if you do bad it's Satans albeit with Gods permission?  Friend, do you know how twisted that sounds.  It makes God guilty of your sin either by commission or omission.



Our sin comes from our own lust within us. The guilt of those sins was inherited from Adam. Jesus took that guilt upon Himself for His people.
Now those that walk by His Spirit are without condemnation.


----------



## NCHillbilly

welderguy said:


> Our sin comes from our own lust within us. The guilt of those sins was inherited from Adam. Jesus took that guilt upon Himself for His people.
> Now those that walk by His Spirit are without condemnation.



Wasn't Adam created in God's own image? Can God sin? Who created us as lustful beings?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

welderguy said:


> Our sin comes from our own lust within us. The guilt of those sins was inherited from Adam. Jesus took that guilt upon Himself for His people.
> Now those that walk by His Spirit are without condemnation.



So it is the Slaves from Africa's fault they were captured into slavery? Or was it God's fault? Or since every sin we perpetrate is born of Adam then we indeed do owe them reparations as part of his lineage?

Good grief!!!


----------



## ambush80

NCHillbilly said:


> So the serpent was the original prototype snek, only with legs installed?



http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/10/20/498575639/how-snakes-lost-their-legs


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> Sorry brother but that still didn't help me to see why all knowing nullifies free will



Do you have the ability to do anything that God didn't already know you were gonna do?  

This has nothing to do with Him making you do anything.

Is God ever surprised by anything you do?  If he is then He's not omniscient; All Knowing.


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> So if you do good it was God making, if you do bad it's Satans albeit with Gods permission?  Friend, do you know how twisted that sounds.  It makes God guilty of your sin either by commission or omission.



It makes God sovereign.  The BIG Boss.


----------



## Israel

Or, you could just consider it this way, the uncreated One, is forming of created ones, those relatable to Himself. Of course there will be some surprises. (for us)
You either believe this, or you do not.

What is not a surprise among some created ones...is that the very meme originally posted is in reference to; not an exposition on the exclusivity of salvation, or its propounding...but the statement of a Being that he is at the edge of your being, willing to come in and share a meal with you, and you with him.

It's almost too much to bear that this is all twisted into "I will punish you if you don't open to me", when it is not that at all. That the man "who couldn't help it" is the same man who emphatically said "Don't come to my house unless you just want to hang out" as seemingly opposed to anyone showing up with pious thoughts of saving his soul..."ministering" or (to my thinking) having any whiff of desire of taking a "conversion scalp".  Well, you just can't make this stuff...up.

We piped, we lamented...seems some could be so hardened against  both dancing and mourning...against both fellowship in joy...or comfort in solace...that...God alone knows... nothing will suffice them. But then...it may just be the right note is waiting to be sounded.


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> Your last statement really surprised me.  If you don't believe in free will you almost have to either believe in God (someone programmed you as a automaton) or either action you make is instinct with no thought nor choice.  What am I missing?



He knows what will happen.  He already knew about it.  The words 'will happen' and 'already knew' are meaningless to an infinite, omniscient being.


----------



## ambush80

Israel said:


> Or, you could just consider it this way, the uncreated One, is forming of created ones, those relatable to Himself. Of course there will be some surprises. You either believe this, or you do not.
> 
> What is not a surprise among some created ones...is that the very meme originally posted is in reference to; not an exposition on the exclusivity of salvation, or its propounding...but the statement of a Being that he is at the edge of your being, willing to come in and share a meal with you, and you with him.
> 
> It's almost too much to bear that this is all twisted into "I will punish you if you don't open to me", when it is not that at all. That the man "who couldn't help it" is the same man who emphatically said "Don't come to my house unless you just want to hang out" as seemingly opposed to anyone showing up with pious thoughts of saving his soul..."ministering" or (to my thinking) having any whiff of desire of taking a "conversion scalp".  Well, you just can't make this stuff...up.
> 
> We piped, we lamented...seems some could be so hardened against  both dancing and mourning...against both fellowship in joy...or comfort in solace...that...God alone knows... nothing will suffice them. But then...it may just be the right note is waiting to be sounded.



In the original meme, Does He know if the door will open or not?


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> So it is the Slaves from Africa's fault they were captured into slavery? Or was it God's fault? Or since every sin we perpetrate is born of Adam then we indeed do owe them reparations as part of his lineage?
> 
> Good grief!!!




Is God ever surprised?


----------



## Israel

He's waiting...ask Him.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes




----------



## WaltL1

ambush80 said:


> Do you have the ability to do anything that God didn't already know you were gonna do?
> 
> This has nothing to do with Him making you do anything.
> 
> Is God ever surprised by anything you do?  If he is then He's not omniscient; All Knowing.


Ambush, I want to make sure I understand your argument correctly.
Basically -
If God knows what you are going to do, freewill/choice is an illusion because you can only choose that which God knows you are going to choose. Which is really not actually making a choice at all.
Have I got it?


----------



## NCHillbilly

ambush80 said:


> http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/10/20/498575639/how-snakes-lost-their-legs



So, if sneks lost their legs 1.5 million years ago, that was around the same time (coincidentally?) when _Homo erectus_ appears on the fossil scene. The species that is often considered to be the first "real" humans in our evolution. Hmmm. Maybe Adam and Eve looked a little different than we have always imagined?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

NCHillbilly said:


> So, if sneks lost their legs 1.5 million years ago, that was around the same time (coincidentally?) when _Homo erectus_ appears on the fossil scene. The species that is often considered to be the first "real" humans in our evolution. Hmmm. Maybe Adam and Eve looked a little different than we have always imagined?



You callin my kinfolk monkeys?


----------



## NCHillbilly

Miguel Cervantes said:


> You callin my kinfolk monkeys?





Monkeys don't make and use fire, make advanced stone tools that require abstract thought to design, or design and make clothing*, or many of the other things that ol' great-grandpap _H. erectus._could do.


----------



## WaltL1

NCHillbilly said:


> So, if sneks lost their legs 1.5 million years ago, that was around the same time (coincidentally?) when _Homo erectus_ appears on the fossil scene. The species that is often considered to be the first "real" humans in our evolution. Hmmm. Maybe Adam and Eve looked a little different than we have always imagined?


I would have left her long before she had time to get me to eat an apple


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

NCHillbilly said:


> Monkeys don't make and use fire, make advanced stone tools that require abstract thought to design, or design and make clothing*, or many of the other things that ol' great-grandpap _H. erectus._could do.


----------



## ambush80

WaltL1 said:


> Ambush, I want to make sure I understand your argument correctly.
> Basically -
> If God knows what you are going to do, freewill/choice is an illusion because you can only choose that which God knows you are going to choose. Which is really not actually making a choice at all.
> Have I got it?



Yes.  You understand.  

It seems like a choice to us because we operate in a temporal world.  Ideas like 'choice', 'I was gonna do' are irrelevant to an eternal, omniscient being.


----------



## ambush80

For Heaven's sake.  Somebody answer the simplest question that I've put out:

In the original meme, does Jesus know if the person will open the door or not?


----------



## NCHillbilly

Miguel Cervantes said:


>



Yes. So can chimps. But, there is a big difference in knocking chunks off a rock and picking up one with a sharp edge; and designing and producing consistent types of advanced stone tools, such as bifaced handaxes and spearpoints. Anyone who has ever started flintknapping knows that it is a very, very, extremely complicated process with a long learning curve, even for us modern humans.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

NCHillbilly said:


> Anyone who has ever started flintknapping knows that it is a very, very, extremely complicated process with a long learning curve, even for us modern humans.



That, or progress has allowed us to regress beyond so many practical things we used to know. By the mere circular arguments / debates we engage in it is evident that we are both smarter than ever before and at the same time dumber than ever before.


----------



## NCHillbilly

WaltL1 said:


> I would have left her long before she had time to get me to eat an apple



She ain't no uglier than Nancy Pelosi.


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


>



The don't use them to cut meat.  When they do that they may follow a similar evolutionary path to ours.


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> That, or progress has allowed us to regress beyond so many practical things we used to know. By the mere circular arguments / debates we engage in it is evident that we are both smarter than ever before and at the same time dumber than ever before.



Is God ever surprised by anything we do?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> Is God ever surprised by anything we do?



That is a question you would have to ask him.


----------



## WaltL1

ambush80 said:


> Yes.  You understand.
> 
> It seems like a choice to us because we operate in a temporal world.  Ideas like 'choice', 'I was gonna do' are irrelevant to an eternal, omniscient being.


Gotcha.
So it boils down to -
Does God knowing = God making.
And the angle to your argument is -
Yes because although he may not physically/mentally/whatever "make" you do anything its the fact that he knows is what removes any choice.
Bingo?

This is one that for whatever reason was always fuzzy for me when trying to think it through.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

ambush80 said:


> I don't care whether or not omniscience exists, or omnipotence or infinity.  It only matters to those guys that want to believe in an omniscient, omnipotent, infinite being.  That's their conundrum to resolve.



Typical.  You "don't care" enough to elaborate on your thoughts. You just foist them up.  Welder shouldn't be the only one accused of throwing crap against the wall and hoping it sticks.


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> That is a question you would have to ask him.




Do you believe that God is omniscient and eternal?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> Do you believe that God is omniscient and eternal?



I do, but my beliefs do not allow me to answer for him. 

Do you believe in God?


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> Typical.  You "don't care" enough to elaborate on your thoughts. You just foist them up.  Welder shouldn't be the only one accused of throwing crap against the wall and hoping it sticks.




I think I've elaborated plenty.  I don't care if those things exit anymore than I care if Quantum Entanglement or Multiverse exist.  They don't affect me in ways that I can use.  If I were to become a Christian, I would very much care about God's Omniscience and Eternal nature.  

If He's omniscient then I do what was written in the Book of Life from before the beginning of time.  God is sovereign.  Every bullet that kills a child in their bed is accounted for just like ALL the blades of grass or hairs on my head.  That's what a great, all knowing, all powerful God does.  He rules over everything.

I don't have to care about any of that because I don't believe in God.


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I do, but my beliefs do not allow me to answer for him.
> 
> Do you believe in God?



No.

The issue is a philosophical one.  You don't have to answer for God, but you can use the mind he gave you to explore the question.  If omniscience exists, how can freewill exist?


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> Ain't nothing to catch on to.  I've always said this both here and up stairs.  It's a systemic and monumental problem with determinism.  God cannot be Holy and the author of evil.  It's illogical which I think you would agree,  and in my opinion patently unscriptural.



You call horrible things God does 'loving' and 'righteous' all the time.  I honestly don't know why you can't do the same thing with freewill.


----------



## ambush80

WaltL1 said:


> Gotcha.
> So it boils down to -
> Does God knowing = God making.
> And the angle to your argument is -
> Yes because although he may not physically/mentally/whatever "make" you do anything its the fact that he knows is what removes any choice.
> Bingo?
> 
> This is one that for whatever reason was always fuzzy for me when trying to think it through.



That's right.  The existence of ANY omniscient being negates freewill, even if He/It's just sitting there 'watching'.  I put 'watching' in quotes because watching implies an active, present tense.  What does 'present tense' mean to an eternal, omniscient being?


----------



## SemperFiDawg

ambush80 said:


> I don't care whether or not omniscience exists, or omnipotence or infinity.  It only matters to those guys that want to believe in an omniscient, omnipotent, infinite being.  That's their conundrum to resolve.



No. I'm not the one just catching on.  I've always said ( more upstairs than here) that it's an inherent problem with determinism/ strict predestination.  It makes a Holy God the author of evil which, even you will agree is an illogical position.  I did mention it here a while back but suprisingly few of you guys commented.

But to be clear, I also think it's unscriptural.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> No.
> 
> The issue is a philosophical one.  You don't have to answer for God, but you can use the mind he gave you to explore the question.  If omniscience exists, how can freewill exist?



I do not practice a philosophy, I practice a religion. 

Now, answer my question.


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I do not practice a philosophy, I practice a religion.
> 
> Now, answer my question.




I said NO.  I don't believe in God.

Why are you so unwilling to discuss omniscience even as a concept?  You can talk about it as an concept completely divorced from ideas about God.


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> No. I'm not the one just catching on.  I've always said ( more upstairs than here) that it's an inherent problem with determinism/ strict predestination.  It makes a Holy God the author of evil which, even you will agree is an illogical position.  I did mention it here a while back but suprisingly few of you guys commented.
> 
> But to be clear, I also think it's unscriptural.



Post 543 please.


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> No. I'm not the one just catching on.  I've always said ( more upstairs than here) that it's an inherent problem with determinism/ strict predestination.  It makes a Holy God the author of evil which, even you will agree is an illogical position.  I did mention it here a while back but suprisingly few of you guys commented.
> 
> But to be clear, I also think it's unscriptural.



Nothing is evil if God does it, even things that we might find reprehensible.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> I said NO.  I don't believe in God.
> 
> Why are you so unwilling to discuss omniscience even as a concept?  You can talk about it as an concept completely divorced from ideas about God.



What would be the point?

I also don't discuss why someone born with a clear genetic gender identity chooses to identify themselves as neither male or female, but instead a caterpillar.


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> What would be the point?
> 
> I also don't discuss why someone born with a clear genetic gender identity chooses to identify themselves as neither male or female, but instead a caterpillar.




Wow.

That's some red herring right there.

You said you believe that God is omniscient.  Don't you think that it's important to be clear about what that proposition entails?


----------



## SemperFiDawg

ambush80 said:


> I think I've elaborated plenty.  I don't care if those things exit anymore.....I don't have to care about any of that because I don't believe in God.



You care enough to go to the trouble of posting caricatures of Christianity on almost a weekly basis yet apparently not enough to defend them when the questions get tough.  Ill say one thing for welder, Walt and bullet; I may disagree but they at least attempt to defend their positions.  You just shoot and run.  Apparently your beliefs are only 'emotion deep'. Stick with drawing.  You're better at it.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

Miguel Cervantes said:


> You callin my kinfolk monkeys?



WHOAAAA!!!   What I miss?


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> You care enough to go to the trouble of posting caricatures of Christianity on almost a weekly basis yet apparently not enough to defend them when the questions get tough.  Ill say one thing for welder, Walt and bullet; I may disagree but they at least attempt to defend their positions.  You just shoot and run.  Apparently your beliefs are only 'emotion deep'. Stick with drawing.  You're better at it.



What?!?

What position do you think I hold that I refuse to defend?  Ask me any question.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

WaltL1 said:


> I would have left her long before she had time to get me to eat an apple



And this is exactly the fundamental downfall of man.  Eve offered Adam an apple when she should have been in the kitchen fixin sum meat n taters.  Thats right, ever problem mankind has ever endured can be traced straight back to a vegan woman.  If than ain't sinful, ain't nuthin.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

NCHillbilly said:


> She ain't no uglier than Nancy Pelosi.





Now that is funny.  Don't care what you believe.


----------



## NCHillbilly

SemperFiDawg said:


> And this is exactly the fundamental downfall of man.  Eve offered Adam an apple when she should have been in the kitchen fixin sum meat n taters.  Thats right, ever problem mankind has ever endured can be traced straight back to a vegan woman.  If than ain't sinful, ain't nuthin.



So is that.


----------



## NCHillbilly

SemperFiDawg said:


> Ain't nothing to catch on to.  I've always said this both here and up stairs.  It's a systemic and monumental problem with determinism.  God cannot be Holy and the author of evil.  It's illogical which I think you would agree,  and in my opinion patently unscriptural.



Did God create Lucifer/the Dev-ill/Satan, who is the epitome of evil? If so, he is by definition the author of evil. If not, he is not the only eternal, omnipotent being "out there." There were a bunch of them to start with, and they might have powers equal to His.


----------



## welderguy

NCHillbilly said:


> Wasn't Adam created in God's own image? Can God sin? Who created us as lustful beings?



Yes, Adam was created in God's image,without sin. But he had the ability to sin, obviously.
He was the closest thing to having free will there ever was, but he still was not free to go against God's purpose.
God told him "in the day you eat thereof,ye shall surely die". No if,ands or buts about any of that.


----------



## gemcgrew

centerpin fan said:


> If you walked up to a complete stranger (someone with no church or theological training) and showed them 1 Tim. 2:4, do you actually believe they would come up with this same interpretation?
> 
> Or would they interpret ALL to be ALL?


Why do you use a theologically ignorant person to support your position?


----------



## red neck richie

NCHillbilly said:


> Did God create Lucifer/the Dev-ill/Satan, who is the epitome of evil? If so, he is by definition the author of evil. If not, he is not the only eternal, omnipotent being "out there." There were a bunch of them to start with, and they might have powers equal to His.



NCH. This is one of the most perplexing questions to me. Since God created Lucifer and he let jealously overwhelm his soul and temps us why wouldn't God destroy him instead of condemn him to he!!. There are two logical explanations to me. Either God loves him no matter what and will not destroy him or a soul cannot be destroyed once created. I know the third option that the aa community has but was wondering your thoughts based on those two options as to stick with the debate at hand. I find it interesting that your Dad was a pastor and you have the views you have and mine was anything but until he found the Lord at 40 yo. You grew up in church and I did not.


----------



## NCHillbilly

gemcgrew said:


> Why do you use a theologically ignorant person to support your position?



Was the Bible written solely for the reading pleasure and interpretations of theologians, or was it written for the masses of humanity?


----------



## WaltL1

NCHillbilly said:


> Was the Bible written solely for the reading pleasure and interpretations of theologians, or was it written for the masses of humanity?


If I'm not mistaken, it was originally written for the Church. Was never originally intended for the masses. Was a crime punishable by death (and was carried out) to translate it out of Latin.


----------



## NCHillbilly

WaltL1 said:


> If I'm not mistaken, it was originally written for the Church. Was never originally intended for the masses. Was a crime punishable by death (and was carried out) to translate it out of Latin.



Smells of Control to me.


----------



## bullethead

ambush80 said:


> Is God ever surprised by anything we do?



"And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart."

Not looking good for an omnicient god..


----------



## WaltL1

NCHillbilly said:


> Smells of Control to me.


Absolutely.
"We'll tell you what we think you should know".


----------



## red neck richie

NCHillbilly said:


> Smells of Control to me.



So its a control issue for you and not spiritual.


----------



## NCHillbilly

red neck richie said:


> NCH. This is one of the most perplexing questions to me. Since God created Lucifer and he let jealously overwhelm his soul and temps us why wouldn't God destroy him instead of condemn him to he!!. There are two logical explanations to me. Either God loves him no matter what and will not destroy him or a soul cannot be destroyed once created. I know the third option that the aa community has but was wondering your thoughts based on those two options as to stick with the debate at hand.



Honestly? I have no idea. 

I will admit that I like to play  Devil's advocate to stir up discussion and try to make people think outside their comfort zone and see what they have to say. 

But here is my honest opinion about religion, after being raised as a fundamentalist Christian by a Baptist preacher, and spending about half a century mulling over and studying various religions:

I believe there is a higher power "out there." I follow no organized religion, but I am a spiritual person.

I believe that it is beyond my comprehension or understanding. I have no idea if it cares one way or the other about me or not.

I believe that most people on Earth feel its presence, and many spend a lot of time trying to explain it and pigeonhole it and bend it to their opinions and interpretations; often for the purpose of controlling the people. I believe that most religions are somebody's cultural interpretation of one part of the whole of "God." Like the blind men feeling of different parts of an elephant, they think they know God when they have only experienced a small isolated part of it.

I believe that a lot of both good and evil have been done in the name of God.

I believe that the folks who wrote the Hebrew/Christian  Bible don't have any firmer grasp on what God is or what it wants than the Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Wiccans, Druids, Greeks, Natchez Sun-worshippers, Lakota shamans, Norse Odin-worshippers, etc. etc.

I have no idea what it is or what it wants, nor will I presume to. 

Now, what kind of "ist" does that make me?


----------



## bullethead

NCHillbilly said:


> Did God create Lucifer/the Dev-ill/Satan, who is the epitome of evil? If so, he is by definition the author of evil. If not, he is not the only eternal, omnipotent being "out there." There were a bunch of them to start with, and they might have powers equal to His.


Yeah, "a constant battle of good vs evil"
How much if a battle could it be for the most powerful force to ever exist?
A snap of the fingers should rid all demons and devil. Snap. Done.
Unless god doesnt want to?
Unless god cannot?

But to say god battles against the dark forces...PLEASE...


----------



## NCHillbilly

bullethead said:


> Yeah, "a constant battle of good vs evil"
> How much if a battle could it be for the most powerful force to ever exist?
> A snap of the fingers should rid all demons and devil. Snap. Done.
> Unless god doesnt want to?
> Unless god cannot?
> 
> But to say god battles against the dark forces...PLEASE...



To say that it is a battle implies that God is vulnerable, no?


----------



## welderguy

NCHillbilly said:


> Honestly? I have no idea.
> 
> I will admit that I like to play  Devil's advocate to stir up discussion and try to make people think outside their comfort zone and see what they have to say.
> 
> But here is my honest opinion about religion, after being raised as a fundamentalist Christian by a Baptist preacher, and spending about half a century mulling over and studying various religions:
> 
> I believe there is a higher power "out there." I follow no organized religion, but I am a spiritual person.
> 
> I believe that it is beyond my comprehension or understanding. I have no idea if it cares one way or the other about me or not.
> 
> I believe that most people on Earth feel its presence, and many spend a lot of time trying to explain it and pigeonhole it and bend it to their opinions and interpretations; often for the purpose of controlling the people. I believe that most religions are somebody's cultural interpretation of one part of the whole of "God." Like the blind men feeling of different parts of an elephant, they think they know God when they have only experienced a small isolated part of it.
> 
> I believe that a lot of both good and evil have been done in the name of God.
> 
> I believe that the folks who wrote the Hebrew/Christian  Bible don't have any firmer grasp on what God is or what it wants than the Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Wiccans, Druids, Greeks, Natchez Sun-worshippers, Lakota shamans, Norse Odin-worshippers, etc. etc.
> 
> I have no idea what it is or what it wants, nor will I presume to.
> 
> Now, what kind of "ist" does that make me?



hon-ist


----------



## red neck richie

NCHillbilly said:


> Honestly? I have no idea.
> 
> I will admit that I like to play  Devil's advocate to stir up discussion and try to make people think outside their comfort zone and see what they have to say.
> 
> But here is my honest opinion about religion, after being raised as a fundamentalist Christian by a Baptist preacher, and spending about half a century mulling over and studying various religions:
> 
> I believe there is a higher power "out there." I follow no organized religion, but I am a spiritual person.
> 
> I believe that it is beyond my comprehension or understanding. I have no idea if it cares one way or the other about me or not.
> 
> I believe that most people on Earth feel its presence, and many spend a lot of time trying to explain it and pigeonhole it and bend it to their opinions and interpretations; often for the purpose of controlling the people. I believe that most religions are somebody's cultural interpretation of one part of the whole of "God." Like the blind men feeling of different parts of an elephant, they think they know God when they have only experienced a small isolated part of it.
> 
> I believe that a lot of both good and evil have been done in the name of God.
> 
> I believe that the folks who wrote the Hebrew/Christian  Bible don't have any firmer grasp on what God is or what it wants than the Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Wiccans, Druids, Greeks, Natchez Sun-worshippers, Lakota shamans, Norse Odin-worshippers, etc. etc.
> 
> I have no idea what it is or what it wants, nor will I presume to.
> 
> Now, what kind of "ist" does that make me?



Just like me. Human.


----------



## ambush80

bullethead said:


> "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart."
> 
> Not looking good for an omnicient god..



"Where are you Adam?"

I love the gymnastics it takes to explain that one.


----------



## bullethead

NCHillbilly said:


> To say that it is a battle implies that God is vulnerable, no?



It sure does.
The writers couldn't cover all the bases.


----------



## bullethead

ambush80 said:


> "Where are you Adam?"
> 
> I love the gymnastics it takes to explain that one.



Truth


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Yeah, "a constant battle of good vs evil"
> How much if a battle could it be for the most powerful force to ever exist?
> A snap of the fingers should rid all demons and devil. Snap. Done.
> Unless god doesnt want to?
> Unless god cannot?
> 
> But to say god battles against the dark forces...PLEASE...



Jesus came to win the war, and win He did.
Our battle is still going on, but God's people are guaranteed the victory through Him.
It's already been purposed.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> I can't tell you the "why" of it, except that God ordained it to be so for His purpose.
> 
> The "who" is Satan, his demons, the holy angels, and us.



Welder, you said that Satan does nothing without Gods permission. So what the heck would god and his angels battle satan and his demons for?
For show?  To make it look good for the people who refuse to put any thought into it.

Satan: Hey Big G, can I posess this soul?
Gid: Sure go ahead.
Satan: yo big G, I tried to posess that soul and you have the parental lock on. 
God: Yep, no soup for you. Maybe next time.


Satan: hey big Geezy, can I torment this sap?
God: Sure
Satan: Thanks. 
Satan to sap: woogieboogieboogieboogieboogie.
Sap: I am suffering bad here God, please help me
God: LOLOLOL


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Welder, you said that Satan does nothing without Gods permission. So what the heck would god and his angels battle satan and his demons for?
> For show?  To make it look good for the people who refuse to put any thought into it.
> 
> Satan: Hey Big G, can I posess this soul?
> Gid: Sure go ahead.
> Satan: yo big G, I tried to posess that soul and you have the parental lock on.
> God: Yep, no soup for you. Maybe next time.
> 
> 
> Satan: hey big Geezy, can I torment this sap?
> God: Sure
> Satan: Thanks.
> Satan to sap: woogieboogieboogieboogieboogie.
> Sap: I am suffering bad here God, please help me
> God: LOLOLOL



My knowledge of the spiritual realm is very limited but the account in Job seems to indicate that God was sort of taunting Satan. God asked satan if he had considered His servant Job, that there was none like him.
But, we also find out in the end that God had a greater purpose for trying Job. To show him His sovereignty and majesty, and also his grace in the midst of suffering.

Bottom line: I think God allows satan to tempt us to ultimately grow us and sanctify us. Sometimes it can be pure he11, but there's always a victorious outcome.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> My knowledge of the spiritual realm is very limited but the account in Job seems to indicate that God was sort of taunting Satan. God asked satan if he had considered His servant Job, that there was none like him.
> But, we also find out in the end that God had a greater purpose for trying Job. To show him His sovereignty and majesty, and also his grace in the midst of suffering.


But there is more to life than trying to associate everything that goes on with a one size fits all bible verse.

You said that God allows Satan to do his dirty deeds.
Then you said God battles Satan. 

It is more of the same nonsense of a god knowing what someone will do, granting permission to do it and then punishing them for doing it.

It is utter ridiculousness.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> But there is more to life than trying to associate everything that goes on with a one size fits all bible verse.
> 
> You said that God allows Satan to do his dirty deeds.
> Then you said God battles Satan.
> 
> It is more of the same nonsense of a god knowing what someone will do, granting permission to do it and then punishing them for doing it.
> 
> It is utter ridiculousness.



God no longer battles with satan. Jesus has defeated him.
I said we still battle him and his demons daily.

You say it's ridiculousness, but God has a very good purpose for it. To grow his people and to show His glory. He will be glorified, even by satan.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> God no longer battles with satan. Jesus has defeated him.
> I said we still battle him and his demons daily.
> 
> You say it's ridiculousness, but God has a very good purpose for it. To grow his people and to show His glory. He will be glorified, even by satan.


Oh.
So it's us against satan and the satanettes...
God /Jesus won so they sit it out.
10-4 good buddy


----------



## bullethead

Lucifer: "light bringer"  "the morning star"

I am the root and offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." (Rev. 22:16)   said who?


----------



## NCHillbilly

welderguy said:


> hon-ist





red neck richie said:


> Just like me. Human.


----------



## NCHillbilly

welderguy said:


> Bottom line: I think God allows satan to tempt us to ultimately grow us and sanctify us. Sometimes it can be pure he11, but there's always a victorious outcome.



Except for them fellers like Charlie Manson and John Wayne Gasey and Adolph Hitler and Josef Stalin and Lizzie Borden and Bill Johnson the atheist that God let Satan tempt into becoming monsters, and they burn in He11 forevenever.


----------



## welderguy

NCHillbilly said:


> Except for them fellers like Charlie Manson and John Wayne Gasey and Adolph Hitler and Josef Stalin and Lizzie Borden and Bill Johnson the atheist that God let Satan tempt into becoming monsters, and they burn in He11 forevenever.



But some on here think God loved them too.


----------



## Artfuldodger

welderguy said:


> Our sin comes from our own lust within us.



So Adam had free will?


----------



## welderguy

Artfuldodger said:


> So Adam had free will?



See post 561


----------



## Artfuldodger

ambush80 said:


> For Heaven's sake.  Somebody answer the simplest question that I've put out:
> 
> In the original meme, does Jesus know if the person will open the door or not?



I would say yes and thus where is the free will in him knowing? Jesus knew Judas would betray him. It was part of his Father's plan. God didn't send Jesus here without a preset plan. 

It matters not if God looked ahead and foresaw Judas betraying Jesus or foresaw that the Jews would be blinded in order for the full number of Gentiles to be grafted in. 

Therefore he has to know who will open the door. If I go to my closet to decide if I will pick the red shirt or blue shirt, God had to foreknow which shirt I would choose. Therefore I can't pick another shirt. If he saw me choose the red shirt before time existed, there is no way in Heaven, I can choose the blue shirt. Unless God knew I was going to pick the red shirt before creation and knew that he would intervene and allow me to pick the blue shirt.
The bottom line is shirt or door, God already knew. Therefore it will have to happen the way he has already seen it happen.


----------



## Artfuldodger

God had to know that Adam would sin and that eventually he would send his Son for salvation. This was already written in Word. Therefore God had to harden Pharaoh's heart. He had to choose Abraham. He had to send Jesus as a Jewish man. He had to harden the Jews to make them do what they did. He had to harden the Jews to allow salvation to the Gentiles. He chose a remnant and hardened the rest. 

This was a preset plan. God didn't react or counter act to what man did. The Jews had no choice but to hang Jesus on a cross. Judas was chosen for his part in this mission. It happened just the way God planned it.

If that's not predestination then it's God using his foreknowledge to look ahead and see that man's freewill was going to make sure his plan happened the way he wanted it to.


----------



## Artfuldodger

WaltL1 said:


> Gotcha.
> So it boils down to -
> Does God knowing = God making.
> And the angle to your argument is -
> Yes because although he may not physically/mentally/whatever "make" you do anything its the fact that he knows is what removes any choice.
> Bingo?
> 
> This is one that for whatever reason was always fuzzy for me when trying to think it through.



I would say that God knowing equals the same thing as God making when it comes to the final event/action.

If God already knows what you will do using your free will such as opening the door, then you must do it the way he has already seen you do it. How could you do it any other way than what he has seen you do?

It may be "described" as free will or "perceived" as free will but one can't change what God knew you would do. 

Now if it did and does happen that way, how did God make sure his plan came to fruition concerning sending his Son to die on a cross?

Is God watching men like a giant game board acting as a Dungeon Master? Counter-acting man's every move to make sure his plan happens the way he has already foresaw it happen? Can it happen any other way, even with freewill or predestination?

And the way God makes his plan come to fruition is somehow free will and not predestination?


----------



## Artfuldodger

welderguy said:


> See post 561



Interesting, is this a Reformed or personal view? Yet God using his foreknowledge already had the Word with him.
His planned Savior for the sin he knew Adam would commit was standing by ready to don his Earth suit.

Therefore Adam had no choice but to sin the way God, using his foresight, saw it. Even if God didn't actually "make" Adam sin. Even if Adam had free will. I would think that if Adam had free will than so do we. 

Didn't Satan have to gain permission or power to tempt Eve to tempt Adam? I'm assuming Satan has no power over God to do anything. I don't think Satan has free will.


----------



## Artfuldodger

WaltL1 said:


> Now you are catching on.
> When/If you get to the point you can examine your own beliefs with that same critical eye "you will have arrived".



I too would like for SFD to look at his beliefs as critical as he looks at Welder's. If he did he would have to see some flaws in his beliefs or at least God acting somewhere in between freewill and predestination.

Personally I don't think he ever can or will.


----------



## Israel

ambush80 said:


> For Heaven's sake.  Somebody answer the simplest question that I've put out:
> 
> In the original meme, does Jesus know if the person will open the door or not?



My sheep listen to My voice; I know them, and they follow Me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one can snatch them out of My hand.…

But you have mixed (or better, the original composer of the meme...) with an image often used to represent a certain passage....with an interpretation of a "something" else entirely, to confuse the matter.

You know very well the image is associated with opportunity to share a meal...to "hang out" (if you can bear it)...to not be...as the cop at door. But it suited the composer to make Jesus appear as the police might..."open up...or else".


yet, I cannot deny, nor will, per my perspective/position at one time, the needfulness of the Law to come knocking. Some perhaps, had an easier time of recognizing their illness for whom the physician had come. Not me, I self treated. I was smart. I had a bag full of resources I thought could avail and keep the physician away...the physician, who, by his mere presence, would bear testimony of my illness. Nope...no one was going to know just how sick I was. "I'll fix this...myself".

But there came a point, a very definite point, and I think now, it was of a Benevolence able to observe my contagion, and contagiousness...(and 'smart' people have a way of infecting others, tricks of injection that a mad Gadarene cannot avail himself of) that a law was invoked. The law of quarantine. 

At the time it appeared the very most heinous thing ever done...me. Locked up, locked out, locked in. Cut off. Decomposing to my own eyes. Obviously...an enemy had done this to me...this quarantine. And the more I struggled in my throes, the more yellow tape went up...around my house.


"No one is allowed to pass...but the physician". Nothing and no one enters or leaves these premises, except the physician...or upon His order.


But hey, that's just _my_ testimony. But I would have never known to call upon him except by the one who invoked the law upon me, the one who posted and made it plain, I could have no visit...except by the physician. Whose visit I once dreaded in what it would make known...of me. Yeah, smart people have lots of cosmetics for the pox marks...for a time. The time till their bag runs out.

Or what king on his way to war with another king will not first sit down and consider whether he can engage with ten thousand men the one coming against him with twenty thousand? And if he is unable, he will send a delegation while the other king is still far off, to ask for terms of peace.…


Utter frustration of will is a gift when allowed to be seen.
The perfection of the opposition, till known in all its perfection is only seen at most, vaguely as enemy. All that "no man" could desire of himself, for himself. But, a friend has done this. Who knows better. What friends...need.


----------



## WaltL1

bullethead said:


> Satan: hey big Geezy, can I torment this sap?
> God: Sure
> Satan: Thanks.
> Satan to sap: woogieboogieboogieboogieboogie.
> Sap: I am suffering bad here God, please help me
> God: LOLOLOL



I cant help but picture Abbott & Costello doing this gig you wrote


----------



## NCHillbilly

My head hurts.


----------



## Artfuldodger

I would think that if the events from Adam to Jesus' ascencion were predestined then the events after that are as well.


----------



## Artfuldodger

I've thought about both sides of the freewill vs predestination argument. I think it's a good subject for everyone to think about.
Maybe life is somewhere in between. Even Atheist have various differing views on the subject. I can see both sides of the argument. I can see scripture that is perceived by man to show both.

I wonder how other faiths/religions view predestination vs freewill?

If one's fate is determined by his actions, wouldn't this fate be considered predestination?


----------



## ambush80

Happy is the puppet who loves his strings.


----------



## Artfuldodger

What if the puppet's strings are controlled by something other than God? Meaning you still have strings but it's something else other than God controlling them.


----------



## welderguy

Ignorant is the puppet who ignores his strings, and then one day is strung up by the neck with them.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

Artfuldodger said:


> I've thought about both sides of the freewill vs predestination argument. I think it's a good subject for everyone to think about.
> Maybe life is somewhere in between. Even Atheist have various differing views on the subject. I can see both sides of the argument. I can see scripture that is perceived by man to show both.
> 
> I wonder how other faiths/religions view predestination vs freewill?
> 
> If one's fate is determined by his actions, wouldn't this fate be considered predestination?



The followers of that human from the middle east sure believe so. They are on their path of martyrdom to earn there 72 virgins. 

What someone failed to point out was a typo in their text, and it actually was suppose to say 72 Virginians.


----------



## welderguy

Miguel Cervantes said:


> The followers of that human from the middle east sure believe so. They are on their path of martyrdom to earn there 72 virgins.
> 
> What someone failed to point out was a typo in their text, and it actually was suppose to say 72 Virginians.



Yep.
Virginia is for lovers, you know.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

welderguy said:


> Yep.
> Virginia is for lovers, you know.



Well, it was more a reference to that ornery bunch of trouble makers that wanted separation from an oppressive regime / king over in England. But yeah, that works too I suppose.


----------



## bullethead

bullethead said:


> Lucifer: "light bringer"  "the morning star"
> 
> I am the root and offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." (Rev. 22:16)   said who?



Welder ^^^


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Welder ^^^



My 2 pesos

Lucifer was the highest ranked angel, and supposedly the most glorious. He was given these names and titles for this reason.
As we know, he was cast out of heaven because he desired to be equal with God.
His status and stature were fallen through his curse.
But now we see who the real bright and morning star is. None other than Jesus Christ, the Lord of all lords.
He is the one referenced here in this Revelation text.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> My 2 pesos
> 
> Lucifer was the highest ranked angel, and supposedly the most glorious. He was given these names and titles for this reason.
> As we know, he was cast out of heaven because he desired to be equal with God.
> His status and stature were fallen through his curse.
> But now we see who the real bright and morning star is. None other than Jesus Christ, the Lord of all lords.
> He is the one referenced here in this Revelation text.


One and the Same


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

bullethead said:


> Lucifer: "light bringer"  "the morning star"
> 
> I am the root and offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." (Rev. 22:16)   said who?



Etymology
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer

The translation of ×”Öµ×™×œÖµ×œ as "Lucifer", as in the King James Version, has been abandoned in modern English translations of Isaiah 14:12. Present-day translations have "morning star" (New International Version, New Century Version, New American Standard Bible, Good News Translation, Holman Christian Standard Bible, Contemporary English Version, Common English Bible, Complete Jewish Bible), "daystar" (New Jerusalem Bible, English Standard Version, The Message, "Day Star" New Revised Standard Version), "shining one" (New Life Version, New World Translation, JPS Tanakh) or "shining star" (New Living Translation).

The term appears in the context of an oracle against a dead king of Babylon,[29] who is addressed as ×”×™×œ×œ ×‘×Ÿ ×©×—×¨ (Hêlêl ben ŠÄ�á¸¥ar),[30][31] rendered by the King James Version as "O Lucifer, son of the morning!" and by others as "morning star, son of the dawn".

In a modern translation from the original Hebrew, the passage in which the phrase "Lucifer" or "morning star" occurs begins with the statement: "On the day the Lord gives you relief from your suffering and turmoil and from the harsh labour forced on you, you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon: How the oppressor has come to an end! How his fury has ended!"[32] After describing the death of the king, the taunt continues:

"How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! You said in your heart, 'I will ascend to the heavens; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of Mount Zaphon. I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.' But you are brought down to the realm of the dead, to the depths of the pit. Those who see you stare at you, they ponder your fate: 'Is this the man who shook the earth and made kingdoms tremble, the man who made the world a wilderness, who overthrew its cities and would not let his captives go home?'"[33]
J. Carl Laney has pointed out that in the final verses here quoted, the king of Babylon is described not as a god or an angel but as a man; and that man may have been not Nebuchadnezzar II, but rather his son, Belshazzar. During the trito Isaiah period of the Persian sacking of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, Nebuchadnezzar was gripped by a spiritual fervor to build a temple to the moon god Sin (possibly analogous with Hubal, the primary God of pre-Islamic Mecca), and his son ruled as regent. The Abrahamic scriptural texts could be interpreted as a weak usurping of true kingly power, and a taunt at the failed regency of Belshazzar.[34][35]

For the unnamed[36] "king of Babylon" a wide range of identifications have been proposed.[37] They include a Babylonian ruler of the prophet Isaiah's own time[37] the later Nebuchadnezzar II, under whom the Babylonian captivity of the Jews began, or Nabonidus,[37][38] and the Assyrian kings Tiglath-Pileser, Sargon II and Sennacherib.[34][37][39] Herbert Wolf held that the "king of Babylon" was not a specific ruler but a generic representation of the whole line of rulers.[40]


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> One and the Same



Hardly.

prove it.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Hardly.
> 
> prove it.



Did god mistakenly give that name and title to Lucifer?
He is the original. The one and only. Kept the title, changed his name.

"And I beheld, and lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth."

The description of the Lamb sure sounds like a horned beast.


----------



## bullethead

"AND Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel."(I Chronicles 21:1)

"AND again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah."(II Samuel 24:1)
Sounds like the same dude


----------



## bullethead

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Etymology
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer
> 
> The translation of ×”Öµ×™×œÖµ×œ as "Lucifer", as in the King James Version, has been abandoned in modern English translations of Isaiah 14:12. Present-day translations have "morning star" (New International Version, New Century Version, New American Standard Bible, Good News Translation, Holman Christian Standard Bible, Contemporary English Version, Common English Bible, Complete Jewish Bible), "daystar" (New Jerusalem Bible, English Standard Version, The Message, "Day Star" New Revised Standard Version), "shining one" (New Life Version, New World Translation, JPS Tanakh) or "shining star" (New Living Translation).
> 
> The term appears in the context of an oracle against a dead king of Babylon,[29] who is addressed as ×”×™×œ×œ ×‘×Ÿ ×©×—×¨ (Hêlêl ben Å Ä�á¸¥ar),[30][31] rendered by the King James Version as "O Lucifer, son of the morning!" and by others as "morning star, son of the dawn".
> 
> In a modern translation from the original Hebrew, the passage in which the phrase "Lucifer" or "morning star" occurs begins with the statement: "On the day the Lord gives you relief from your suffering and turmoil and from the harsh labour forced on you, you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon: How the oppressor has come to an end! How his fury has ended!"[32] After describing the death of the king, the taunt continues:
> 
> "How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! You said in your heart, 'I will ascend to the heavens; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of Mount Zaphon. I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.' But you are brought down to the realm of the dead, to the depths of the pit. Those who see you stare at you, they ponder your fate: 'Is this the man who shook the earth and made kingdoms tremble, the man who made the world a wilderness, who overthrew its cities and would not let his captives go home?'"[33]
> J. Carl Laney has pointed out that in the final verses here quoted, the king of Babylon is described not as a god or an angel but as a man; and that man may have been not Nebuchadnezzar II, but rather his son, Belshazzar. During the trito Isaiah period of the Persian sacking of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, Nebuchadnezzar was gripped by a spiritual fervor to build a temple to the moon god Sin (possibly analogous with Hubal, the primary God of pre-Islamic Mecca), and his son ruled as regent. The Abrahamic scriptural texts could be interpreted as a weak usurping of true kingly power, and a taunt at the failed regency of Belshazzar.[34][35]
> 
> For the unnamed[36] "king of Babylon" a wide range of identifications have been proposed.[37] They include a Babylonian ruler of the prophet Isaiah's own time[37] the later Nebuchadnezzar II, under whom the Babylonian captivity of the Jews began, or Nabonidus,[37][38] and the Assyrian kings Tiglath-Pileser, Sargon II and Sennacherib.[34][37][39] Herbert Wolf held that the "king of Babylon" was not a specific ruler but a generic representation of the whole line of rulers.[40]



Not my commentary, but found it interesting..



> This verse presents the most shocking revelation in the entire Bible. On the very last page, it reveals Jesus as the "bright and morning star". In other words, Lucifer-- Satan!
> 
> In Isaiah 14:12, St. Jerome, translated the Hebrew "morning star" into the Latin term "Lucifer" (light bearer), a name commonly ascribed to Satan by Christians, and represents the fallen star, an ancient symbol for the fallen or evil one. The mourning star actually appears as the planet Venus, the brightest "star" in the sky (but the ancients did not know about planets). Venus always appears low on the horizon, thus it looked like a fallen star (fallen angel) to the believers.
> 
> Although the Isaiah verse describes the fallen king of Babylon, Christians have, for centuries, ascribed Satan as taking many forms. And what more powerful form could an evil being take than to pretend himself as the saviour of the world? This would certainly explain the hate filled verses attributed to Jesus and the blind followers who inherit ignorance. Thus, a conclusion, based on Christian beliefs of Satan, and the belief in the "inerrancy" of the Bible, one must conclude that Jesus has revealed himself as Satan!
> 
> What a Revelation!


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Did god mistakenly give that name and title to Lucifer?
> He is the original. The one and only. Kept the title, changed his name.
> 
> "And I beheld, and lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth."
> 
> The description of the Lamb sure sounds like a horned beast.



Lol. Are you trying to convince me that the Lamb is Satan?
You've reached an all time low my friend.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> "AND Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel."(I Chronicles 21:1)
> 
> "AND again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah."(II Samuel 24:1)
> Sounds like the same dude



Or try this:
God allowed Satan to tempt David. See how Satan did it, but actually God was the ultimate cause?

Thanks, this supports what I was saying earlier.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Lol. Are you trying to convince me that the Lamb is Satan?
> You've reached an all time low my friend.



7 horns and 7 eyes, I have not seen a Lamb like that.
I do not want to convince anyone of anything. I am just reading the bible and sharing some verses.
Don't be Jealous, thats the name your god goes by..
"For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God: Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go a whoring after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters so a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods. Thou shalt make thee no molten gods."(Exodus 34:14-16)"

A jealous God....? Interesting


----------



## Artfuldodger

God also allowed Satan to rebel in Heaven. Therefore Satan must have had freewill after all. 
Perhaps he has freewill but still not the power over humans without God's permission.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Or try this:
> God allowed Satan to tempt David. See how Satan did it, but actually God was the ultimate cause?
> 
> Thanks, this supports what I was saying earlier.


Try these..
"And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, that David took an harp, and played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him."(I Samuel 16:23)
Evil spirit FROM GOD

"And the evil spirit from the LORD was upon Saul, as he sat in his house with his javelin in his hand: and David played with his hand." (I Samuel 19:9)
Evil spirit FROM the LORD


----------



## bullethead

Artfuldodger said:


> God also allowed Satan to rebel in Heaven. Therefore Satan must have had freewill after all.
> Perhaps he has freewill but still not the power over humans without God's permission.



There seems to be a lot of "perhaps" lately when trying to figure out the truth about THE WORD of god.


----------



## bullethead

I am still a little taken back why the most powerful being/spirit is Jealous.
That doesn't sound like the MOST powerful god, or the only god.  Just a god that lets it's temper get the best of itself.
I wonder if there are any bible verses that show that??


----------



## bullethead

Off to the beach men, ill pop back later.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Try these..
> "And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, that David took an harp, and played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him."(I Samuel 16:23)
> Evil spirit FROM GOD
> 
> "And the evil spirit from the LORD was upon Saul, as he sat in his house with his javelin in his hand: and David played with his hand." (I Samuel 19:9)
> Evil spirit FROM the LORD



Spend the rest of the day in deep study on these two verses and maybe you will see the error in your thinking.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> Off to the beach men, ill pop back later.



May the sharks bite softly and the jellyfish take a wide berth.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

WaltL1 said:


> Gotcha.
> So it boils down to -
> Does God knowing = God making.
> And the angle to your argument is -
> Yes because although he may not physically/mentally/whatever "make" you do anything its the fact that he knows is what removes any choice.
> Bingo?
> 
> This is one that for whatever reason was always fuzzy for me when trying to think it through.




Still fuzzy to me.  I know the score of a football final.  Doesn't mean I influenced the outcome.  In fact, it would seem to me that free will may be the sole argument against that line of reasoning, because if they are automatons then Yes, I can see your argument standing.  HMMM.  More thinking needed on this.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

WaltL1 said:


> If I'm not mistaken, it was originally written ....



to the Church for the masses.  

I think most would agree that is more accurate.  Though the Roman Catholic Church did their level best to hide it and were successful for about 1000 years.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

NCHillbilly said:


> Smells of Control to me.



That's exactly what the RCC used it for too.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> But some on here think God loved them too.



If one of them was your child would it bother you what they had done?  If yes, then why?  Because you loved them.    Doesn't absolve them or indict you.


----------



## WaltL1

SemperFiDawg said:


> Still fuzzy to me.  I know the score of a football final.  Doesn't mean I influenced the outcome.  In fact, it would seem to me that free will may be the sole argument against that line of reasoning, because if they are automatons then Yes, I can see your argument standing.  HMMM.  More thinking needed on this.


First, its not my argument.
However it is a sound argument from what I see (so far).
IF -
God knows IN ADVANCE what you are going to do -
Then when it comes time to do it you have no choice but to do what he already knows you will do. Otherwise God would be wrong and then wouldn't be Omni-everything.
To you it appears you chose to go left instead of right.
You think you used freewill/choice.
But if God already saw/knows what you were going to do you had no choice but to choose what he already saw/knows.
You didn't actually have a choice.
If you did, you could choose to do something different than what he already saw.
And God would have been wrong.


----------



## WaltL1

SemperFiDawg said:


> to the Church for the masses.
> 
> I think most would agree that is more accurate.  Though the Roman Catholic Church did their level best to hide it and were successful for about 1000 years.


By the Church for the Church so the Church could teach the masses from it as the Church saw fit.

The most accurate.


----------



## NCHillbilly

SemperFiDawg said:


> That's exactly what the RCC used it for too.



Yep. A few hundred years ago, Christianity was about where Islam is today-a religious/political/social system to control the masses. Their own version of Sharia-most of the kings of Europe bended their knee to the Pope. And some of them would cut your head off if you didn't conform to it.


----------



## welderguy

NCHillbilly said:


> Yep. A few hundred years ago, Christianity was about where Islam is today-a religious/political/social system to control the masses. Their own version of Sharia-most of the kings of Europe bended their knee to the Pope. And some of them would cut your head off if you didn't conform to it.



That's a blanket statement about Christianity as a whole.

You should amend it to say "man-based Christianity".


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> First, its not my argument.
> However it is a sound argument from what I see (so far).
> IF -
> God knows IN ADVANCE what you are going to do -
> Then when it comes time to do it you have no choice but to do what he already knows you will do. Otherwise God would be wrong and then wouldn't be Omni-everything.
> To you it appears you chose to go left instead of right.
> You think you used freewill/choice.
> But if God already saw/knows what you were going to do you had no choice but to choose what he already saw/knows.
> You didn't actually have a choice.
> If you did, you could choose to do something different than what he already saw.
> And God would have been wrong.



This is still not quite the way I would say it(not saying it's wrong,just too vague)

I would say God already HAD HIS PURPOSE, you had no choice but to choose what He ALREADYPURPOSED.

My point for saying this is that God is active in our lives("very present help"), not just a spectator watching a re-run of something. He acts in accordance with His eternal purpose that He's always had.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> This is still not quite the way I would say it(not saying it's wrong,just too vague)
> 
> I would say God already HAD HIS PURPOSE, you had no choice but to choose what He ALREADYPURPOSED.
> 
> My point for saying this is that God is active in our lives("very present help"), not just a spectator watching a re-run of something. He acts in accordance with His eternal purpose that He's always had.


Whether he purposed it, watched it, heard about it or saw it on a piece of toast doesn't affect the argument.
Its the fact that he knows in advance is what is the controlling factor.

And considering I don't think there is proof a god exists, I'm certainly not current with what his daily schedule is so I wont debate the rest.


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> If one of them was your child would it bother you what they had done?  If yes, then why?  Because you loved them.    Doesn't absolve them or indict you.



Your analogy does not fit God's promises regarding His purchased possessions.

In other words, if God loves every single person, then that means He purchased every single one with His blood.
But that would have to mean every single one would spend eternity in heaven with Him...because God doesn't go back and get a refund on any of His purchased possessions.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> Whether he purposed it, watched it, heard about it or saw it on a piece of toast doesn't affect the argument.
> Its the fact that he knows in advance is what is the controlling factor.
> 
> And considering I don't think there is proof a god exists, I'm certainly not current with what his daily schedule is so I wont debate the rest.



good enough


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> You've reached an all time low my friend.



Nah.  He's just getting warmed up.   You can't keep up.  It takes them 5 seconds to spout off some ridiculous lie or caricature and you spend hours/days refuting it.   Just call it for what it is, a lie, and move on.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> Your analogy does not fit God's promises regarding His purchased possessions.
> 
> In other words, if God loves every single person, then that means He purchased every single one with His blood.
> But that would have to mean every single one would spend eternity in heaven with Him...because God doesn't go back and get a refund on any of His purchased possessions.



Go back and look at the context.  He's referring to those already saved.  CPF has already tried to point this out to you.

BTW. You didn't answer the question.


----------



## bullethead

Guys the more we talk about this stuff the more I find out a god that is supposed to be all knowing and all powerful is nothing of the sort. He is Jealous, surprised, angry, spiteful, tormenting, depressed, able to be easily fooled and on and on and on.
He nothing even remotely close to being a god let alone Omniscient and Omnipotent.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

WaltL1 said:


> First, its not my argument.
> However it is a sound argument from what I see (so far).
> IF -
> God knows IN ADVANCE what you are going to do -
> Then when it comes time to do it you have no choice but to do what he already knows you will do. Otherwise God would be wrong and then wouldn't be Omni-everything.
> To you it appears you chose to go left instead of right.
> You think you used freewill/choice.
> But if God already saw/knows what you were going to do you had no choice but to choose what he already saw/knows.
> You didn't actually have a choice.
> If you did, you could choose to do something different than what he already saw.
> And God would have been wrong.



Im saying we have a choice, which negates the conclusion.  Be careful, because I had to think through it, but as it stands above those 2 words make it circular reasoning.


----------



## bullethead

SemperFiDawg said:


> Nah.  He's just getting warmed up.   You can't keep up.  It takes them 5 seconds to spout off some ridiculous lie or caricature and you spend hours/days refuting it.   Just call it for what it is, a lie, and move on.



I love that you learned a new word about a week ago and now have to include it in a post at least daily.
I will give welder credit, he tries to refute tje things the best he can.
You, say LIE! Mumble something about a caricature and move on thinking that your word in a conversation is the end all. You avoid explanation like the plague because you cannot back up your position with any sort of fact. 

If you have a reason why anything is a lie then post it or else go rip another page off of your word of the day calendar and get ready for next week.


----------



## NCHillbilly

welderguy said:


> That's a blanket statement about Christianity as a whole.
> 
> You should amend it to say "man-based Christianity".



What other kind is there? I don't know of any other creatures that practice it except man.


----------



## NCHillbilly

bullethead said:


> Guys the more we talk about this stuff the more I find out a god that is supposed to be all knowing and all powerful is nothing of the sort. He is Jealous, surprised, angry, spiteful, tormenting, depressed, able to be easily fooled and on and on and on.
> He nothing even remotely close to being a god let alone Omniscient and Omnipotent.



That was one thing that was interesting about the Greek gods-they were infested with all the same foibles that we are.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

welderguy said:


> That's a blanket statement about Christianity as a whole.
> 
> You should amend it to say "man-based Christianity".



Actually you are both wrong.  Read Foxes Book of Martyrs and you will soon realize that even during the Dark
Ages there were small groups outside the RCC who held to the teachings of Christ and the early Church.  The RCC basically had a thousand year crusade to stamp them out, but they never succeeded.  Sadly it's the atrocities of the RCC and its "control" is used to paint the entire Church today RC and Protestant.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

WaltL1 said:


> First, its not my argument.
> However it is a sound argument from what I see (so far).
> IF -
> God knows IN ADVANCE what you are going to do -
> Then when it comes time to do it you have no choice but to do what he already knows you will do. Otherwise God would be wrong and then wouldn't be Omni-everything.
> To you it appears you chose to go left instead of right.
> You think you used freewill/choice.
> But if God already saw/knows what you were going to do you had no choice but to choose what he already saw/knows.
> You didn't actually have a choice.
> If you did, you could choose to do something different than what he already saw.
> And God would have been wrong.



Think about it Walt.  If he's omni everything, he also knows the outcome of not just what you chose, but the outcome of ANY CONCEIVABLE choice.  Gnaw on that fer a minute.


----------



## bullethead

NCHillbilly said:


> That was one thing that was interesting about the Greek gods-they were infested with all the same foibles that we are.



Ive noticed that as talented as writers were back in those times their gods(that includes every god from every religion) is touted as being above a human but has the same human qualities and shortcomings as a human.

The gods are only as strong as the men writing about them and just as weak.
All these gods were made in our image.


----------



## bullethead

SemperFiDawg said:


> Think about it Walt.  If he's omni everything, he also knows the outcome of not just what you chose, but the outcome of ANY CONCEIVABLE choice.  Gnaw on that fer a minute.



And yet the same god had to ask Adam where he was. "Adam where are you"...


----------



## Artfuldodger

While it's true God would know the outcome of any CONCEIVABLE choice, he knew what choice you would make.

God is not basing his actions on your conceivable choices. He is basing his actions on your one and only choice that he foresaw.

If God has already seen your choice then that is the choice you must make. Regardless of how many conceivable choices there are.

It's not like if Art does this then God will do this but if Art happens to do something else then God will do something else.

If God already knows who will open the door, then that person must open the door. If God already knows who will not open the door, then that person can't open the door. In this manner it is the same as Election because God already knows who will open the door.

The difference in this scenario is God is using foreknowledge to elect instead of whatever he uses under the Election method the Reformed believe.


----------



## bullethead

Artfuldodger said:


> While it's true God would know the outcome of any CONCEIVABLE choice, he knew what choice you would make.
> 
> God is not basing his actions on your conceivable choices. He is basing his actions on your one and only choice that he foresaw.
> 
> If God has already seen your choice then that is the choice you must make. Regardless of how many conceivable choice there are.
> 
> It's not like if Art does this then God will do this but if Art happens to do something else then God will do something else.
> 
> If God already knows who will open the door, then that person must open the door. If God already knows who will not open the door, then that person can't open the door. In this manner it is the same as Election because God already knows who will open the door.
> 
> The difference in this scenario is God is using foreknowledge to elect instead of whatever he uses under the Election method the Reformed believe.


"Adam where are you?"
Where is his foreknowledge? Why did have to ask?


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> "Adam where are you?"
> Where is his foreknowledge? Why did have to ask?



He didn't. It was rhetorical. Duh


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> He didn't. It was rhetorical. Duh



The bible doesnt say it was rhetorical.


----------



## welderguy

SemperFiDawg said:


> Go back and look at the context.  He's referring to those already saved.  CPF has already tried to point this out to you.
> 
> BTW. You didn't answer the question.



I want to discuss this but this post has got me scratching my head. Can you re-word it and fill in a few missing blanks?

BTW, the answer to your question is "yes,of course", but is irrelevant to this.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> The bible doesnt say it was rhetorical.



The bible as a whole proves it is.

How about when it says God is everywhere present and nowhere absent?
Does that settle it in your mind or do you need more?


----------



## ambush80

SemperFiDawg said:


> Im saying we have a choice, which negates the conclusion.  Be careful, because I had to think through it, but as it stands above those 2 words make it circular reasoning.





SemperFiDawg said:


> Think about it Walt.  If he's omni everything, he also knows the outcome of not just what you chose, but the outcome of ANY CONCEIVABLE choice.  Gnaw on that fer a minute.



"Choice" is a weird word to use if there exists a being that's all knowing.  It may seem like a choice to you but does the all knowing being see it as a choice?  The all knowing being already knew what you were gonna do and it knew it from eternity.  It always knew it.  Forever.

I know I've used this analogy many times before but it still seems the best way to illustrate what we're talking about.  Does Goldilocks have the choice of which bed to sleep in? To her it seemed like it.  She may have had sweaty palms, a furrowed brow,  A feeling of guilt, but "We" all know which bed she sleeps in.  She does it every time.  That's got to be a bit like omniscience.


----------



## ambush80

welderguy said:


> The bible as a whole proves it is.
> 
> How about when it says God is everywhere present and nowhere absent?
> Does that settle it in your mind or do you need more?



I don't. Amen, Brother.   That's then God I want to worship.  God better be GOD or I'm wasting my time worshiping Him.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

ambush80 said:


> I don't. Amen, Brother.   That's then God I want to worship.  God better be GOD or I'm wasting my time worshiping Him.



Time is irrelevant.


----------



## ambush80

WaltL1 said:


> First, its not my argument.
> However it is a sound argument from what I see (so far).
> IF -
> God knows IN ADVANCE what you are going to do -
> Then when it comes time to do it you have no choice but to do what he already knows you will do. Otherwise God would be wrong and then wouldn't be Omni-everything.
> To you it appears you chose to go left instead of right.
> You think you used freewill/choice.
> But if God already saw/knows what you were going to do you had no choice but to choose what he already saw/knows.
> You didn't actually have a choice.
> If you did, you could choose to do something different than what he already saw.
> And God would have been wrong.



Walt,
Check this out.  This is a better argument for the lack of freewill.  I can't seem to refute his argument but I also don't see how to apply it usefully.  Try to get through at least 19 minutes of it.  If you can't jump to 19 min and do his experiment.


"Were you free to choose, that which did not occur to you to choose?"

Notice when people in the audience laugh, they're laughing at something that's absolutely true about how silly people are.


----------



## WaltL1

SemperFiDawg said:


> Im saying we have a choice, which negates the conclusion.  Be careful, because I had to think through it, but as it stands above those 2 words make it circular reasoning.


You come to a 4 way stop sign.
It appears to you that you have a choice of going left, right or forward.
God has already seen/knows that you are going to go left.
Ok now its time to choose.
Can you choose to go right or forward?


----------



## Israel

WaltL1 said:


> You come to a 4 way stop sign.
> It appears to you that you have a choice of going left, right or forward.
> God has already seen/knows that you are going to go left.
> Ok now its time to choose.
> Can you choose to go right or forward?



Can you choose...to be?


----------



## WaltL1

Israel said:


> Can you choose...to be?


Depends on what you mean by.... to be.
I could choose to be....... a dentist.
I could not choose to be....... created by my parents.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

WaltL1 said:


> I could not choose to be....... created by my parents.


That would be their choice not yours, and commensurate with your line of questioning, they had no choice but to make you "be".


----------



## WaltL1

Miguel Cervantes said:


> That would be their choice not yours, and commensurate with your line of questioning, they had no choice but to make you "be".





> That would be their choice not yours,


Correct.


> they had no choice but to make you "be".


Considering the trouble I gave them, I'm not sure they have yet forgiven "God" for that


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> The bible as a whole proves it is.
> 
> How about when it says God is everywhere present and nowhere absent?
> Does that settle it in your mind or do you need more?


The bible says many things and then contradicts those things.
That is what is settled in my mind.
If the bible says god is everywhere at all times, and then in another verse he cannot find someone then that negates the god is everywhere claim.
It wouldn't mention that god couldn't find him if it was not important or untrue. If god was everywhere he would not need to ask where someone was or is.


----------



## Israel

bullethead said:


> The bible says many things and then contradicts those things.
> That is what is settled in my mind.
> If the bible says god is everywhere at all times, and then in another verse he cannot find someone then thst negates the god is everywhere claim.
> It wouldn't mention thwt god couldn't find him if it was not important or untrue.




If "the Bible" could be unabashed, it surely makes no pretense of resolving itself to anyone, and yet you speak like a man just discovering a thing....of which the Bible is "unabashedly plain".

Answer not a fool according to his folly, Lest thou be like to him — even thou.

Answer a fool according to his folly, Lest he be wise in his own eyes.

In one place "answer not"...in the very next "answer". It, (the Bible) makes no place for apology. Resolution is not found in "doing what the Bible says", but something else.

How then could one "do" in accordance with this 

"Touch not mine anointed ones, And do my prophets no harm." 

and this?

And a certain man of the sons of the prophets said unto his neighbor by the word of the LORD, Smite me, I pray you. And the man refused to smite him.

Then said he unto him, Because you have not obeyed the voice of the LORD, behold, as soon as you are departed from me, a lion shall slay you. And as soon as he was departed from him, a lion found him, and slew him.

Then he found another man, and said, Smite me, I pray you. And the man struck him, so that in smiting he wounded him. (The second man is never revealed as to having suffered any harm)

I don't know if you are looking for a "how to" book, you've never given me that impression. But if you think all of us read it as such, I can only speak for myself...I do not.


----------



## bullethead

Israel said:


> If "the Bible" could be unabashed, it surely makes no pretense of resolving itself to anyone, and yet you speak like a man just discovering a thing....of which the Bible is "unabashedly plain".
> 
> Answer not a fool according to his folly, Lest thou be like to him — even thou.
> 
> Answer a fool according to his folly, Lest he be wise in his own eyes.
> 
> In one place "answer not"...in the very next "answer". It, (the Bible) makes no place for apology. Resolution is not found in "doing what the Bible says", but something else.
> 
> How then could one "do" in accordance with this
> 
> "Touch not mine anointed ones, And do my prophets no harm."
> 
> and this?
> 
> And a certain man of the sons of the prophets said unto his neighbor by the word of the LORD, Smite me, I pray you. And the man refused to smite him.
> 
> Then said he unto him, Because you have not obeyed the voice of the LORD, behold, as soon as you are departed from me, a lion shall slay you. And as soon as he was departed from him, a lion found him, and slew him.
> 
> Then he found another man, and said, Smite me, I pray you. And the man struck him, so that in smiting he wounded him. (The second man is never revealed as to having suffered any harm)
> 
> I don't know if you are looking for a "how to" book, you've never given me that impression. But if you think all of us read it as such, I can only speak for myself...I do not.



“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.”


Thats all that needed be said in the bible by a god.

The rest is conflicting contradicting fables of men and what they think their god was or is.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

WaltL1 said:


> Correct.
> 
> Considering the trouble I gave them, I'm not sure they have yet forgiven "God" for that



Same here.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> The bible says many things and then contradicts those things.
> That is what is settled in my mind.
> If the bible says god is everywhere at all times, and then in another verse he cannot find someone then that negates the god is everywhere claim.
> It wouldn't mention that god couldn't find him if it was not important or untrue. If god was everywhere he would not need to ask where someone was or is.






Proverbs 15:3
3 The eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good.

2 Chronicles 16:9
9 For the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to shew himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect toward him.

Psalm 139:7-10
7 Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?
8 If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in CensoredCensoredCensoredCensored, behold, thou art there.
9 If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea;
10 Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me.

 
I rest my case.


----------



## Artfuldodger

bullethead said:


> "Adam where are you?"
> Where is his foreknowledge? Why did have to ask?



I'm pretty sure it was because Adam "thought" he was hiding from God. God didn't have to ask. I've asked many questions when I already knew the answer.

I don't see how anyone can read scripture and not see parts that are perceived to be freewill and other parts that are perceived to be predestined.
It is a conundrum. The die hard predestination believers read it the way they believe and the die hard free will believers read it the way they believe.

I personally would rather believe in free will as that was my indoctrination. Learning or better yet "accepting" that God is omni-everything, makes this concept hard to believe. Suddenly my choices don't seem like choices any more. If my actions cause certain reactions from God, then my future becomes predestined. Even if my past wasn't. 
So maybe I had free will until I received salvation and now God controls my destiny. Unlike Adam who had free will until he lost his salvation and was then predestined.

Could we say the lost have free will and Christians don't? Do we have limited free will controlled a bit by God, Satan, the environment, fate, circumstance, natural occurrences like cancer, tornadoes, evolution?

If I make a decision to do something and God counters with another then where is the free will in that? Suddenly my future is predestined.

If a loved one is dying and that is God's original plan but I pray and God intervenes, God has changed that person's original destiny/fate. Some pray for God's will to be done. That's kinda useless because God's will is always done. Even if we pray for him to change his mind/actions. If we get God to do this then our will becomes God's will.

If one beleives in Karma then one had the free will to do the good or bad deed but Karma suddenly controls your future. Your future becomes predestined by Karma.


----------



## Artfuldodger

welderguy said:


> 2 Chronicles 16:9
> 9 For the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to shew himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect toward him.



I wonder how free will believers picture God showing himself strong to those whose heart is perfect throughout the whole earth? 

It's not like every person in the whole world has heard the gospel from man yet there are some throughout the world  whose heart is perfect toward God.

How did their heart become perfect toward God?
This is one problem I see with free will. It requires the intervention of man to intervene and save the souls of the world. God loves the whole world yet he let's millions die without man ever reaching them to receive salvation. 
Does this sound like a better plan than God showing himself strong to those whose heart is perfect towards him?


----------



## Israel

bullethead said:


> “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.”
> 
> 
> Thats all that needed be said in the bible by a god.
> 
> The rest is conflicting contradicting fables of men and what they think their god was or is.



That's an interesting "choice" of scripture. 
God reminding man who He is, and what man is not.
What good father wouldn't?


----------



## Israel

WaltL1 said:


> Depends on what you mean by.... to be.
> I could choose to be....... a dentist.
> I could not choose to be....... created by my parents.



What a _seeming_ "crap shoot" in that last line, no?
Talk about rolling the dice. Can easily make a man wonder if he _had to be at all_. Just one slightly faster swimmer in that intrauterine free style and who would I be talking (writing) to? Or who here, would be writing...if at all.
Who knows...in that scenario it could be the "almost me" writing to the almost you.
But regardless, what else would a man have unless he's convinced (been convinced) he _has been_ purposed...to be?

It seems I spend a lot of time speaking with men suffering from phantom pains of a life they almost lived, and for this they blame the one who has purposed them...to be...precisely.  But He knows...man.

And allows him all his own reasons...till they are exhausted. 

"And if you have not been faithful in the use of that which is another's, who will give you that which is your own?


----------



## bullethead

Israel said:


> That's an interesting "choice" of scripture.
> God reminding man who He is, and what man is not.
> What good father wouldn't?



He is telling you to not put words in his mouth or speak for him or think for him. You are unable to decifer his ways so don't try.

As soon as believers start to interpret the bible they are already trying to do something in which they cant


----------



## Israel

bullethead said:


> He is telling you to not put words in his mouth or speak for him or think for him. You are unable to decifer his ways so don't try.
> 
> As soon as believers start to interpret the bible they are already trying to do something in which they cant




Bless, you...brother.


----------



## Israel

Before considering saying much beyond this, one would have to understand Jesse's final words in the clip. 
I didn't write the movie, send in any revisions for the script. In fact I don't know who wrote it, don't need to, or care to. It's enough that at least one other, I assume I have never met...understands a key thing of relationship in being...and makes it a known thing.




PS: It will not hurt to have at least a passing familiarity with the words and works of the philosopher, Marx.

"I would not belong to any club that would have me as a member"...Groucho Marx.


----------



## Osprey

WaltL1 said:


> Was a crime punishable by death (and was carried out) to translate it out of Latin.



This is false. There are no Church documents that ever state this. The idea of this was taken from a time when Paulines translated scriptures into French and added many passages to fit their narrative. After finding out about the translation with the errors the Church had the translations collected and destroyed.


----------



## welderguy

bullethead said:


> He is telling you to not put words in his mouth or speak for him or think for him. You are unable to decifer his ways so don't try.



Then why are YOU telling US what He's saying ^^here^^ then???

(where's that tail chasing dog video when I need it?)



Here's the key to any and all understanding of God:

1 Cor.2:15-16
15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

bullethead said:


> I love that you learned a new word about a week ago and now have to include it in a post at least daily.



It's faster and takes slightly more thought than the same old tired, cut n paste memes that you guys espouse.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

Osprey said:


> This is false. There are no Church documents that ever state this. The idea of this was taken from a time when Paulist translated scriptures into French and added many passages to fit their narrative. After finding out about the translation with the errors the Church had the translations collected and destroyed.



The interlinear Bible says otherwise.
This and many other old testament scriptures.

http://www.biblestudytools.com/interlinear-bible/passage/?q=deuteronomy++21:22-23&t=kjv

Deuteronomy 21:22-23

From Hebrew - Transliterated to Maveth 

death, dying, Death (personified), realm of the dead
death
death by violence (as a penalty)
state of death, place of death


----------



## Israel

WaltL1 said:


> If I'm not mistaken, it was originally written for the Church. Was never originally intended for the masses. Was a crime punishable by death (and was carried out) to translate it out of Latin.



Interesting...huh? How terrible for the rulers of this age to discover. Thinking they could handle, and by handling control what is never theirs for control. It's a poison pill kinda thing. As if the Lord, of whom it bears testimony...is stupid...and manipulable.

(I could show you my burns)

Not unlike this, (I'm the third Nazi from the left...or was)


----------



## Israel

Miguel Cervantes said:


> The interlinear Bible says otherwise.
> This and many other old testament scriptures.
> 
> http://www.biblestudytools.com/interlinear-bible/passage/?q=deuteronomy++21:22-23&t=kjv
> 
> Deuteronomy 21:22-23
> 
> From Hebrew - Transliterated to Maveth
> 
> death, dying, Death (personified), realm of the dead
> death
> death by violence (as a penalty)
> state of death, place of death




I am rejoicing in your posting of that. (Actually the part that did not show up in the copy and paste (quote option).


----------



## ambush80

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Time is irrelevant.



Not to me, a temporal being.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Then why are YOU telling US what He's saying ^^here^^ then???
> 
> (where's that tail chasing dog video when I need it?)
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the key to any and all understanding of God:
> 
> 1 Cor.2:15-16
> 15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
> 16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.



Because i have to use your ball or you won'tplay the game.
Since you want to discuss/argue what an unknowable being knows and since you want to discuss/argue what an unhearable being says and since you want to discuss/argue what a being that is beyond your thought thinks...well, I/we gotta use the book that you base it all on to show you how corrupt, fallible, inaccurate, contradicting and blatently human the writers were that you follow instead of you following an actual god.

No need to show me more examples of what an abomination that book is welder, thats why we are discussing it in the first place.


----------



## bullethead

SemperFiDawg said:


> It's faster and takes slightly more thought than the same old tired, cut n paste memes that you guys espouse.



Not if you are clever enough to make a meme.

But your tactic of answering one unimportant part of a post and totally unAdressing  the rest is real talent.


----------



## bullethead

Israel said:


> Interesting...huh? How terrible for the rulers of this age to discover. Thinking they could handle, and by handling control what is never theirs for control. It's a poison pill kinda thing. As if the Lord, of whom it bears testimony...is stupid...and manipulable.
> 
> (I could show you my burns)
> 
> Not unlike this, (I'm the third Nazi from the left...or was)


When you assemble the book you make the rules.


----------



## Israel

bullethead said:


> When you assemble the book you make the rules.



It would seem so, wouldn't it?
But if one is appointed for assembly, but then further presumes ownership...well you could see where that goes, even just using a line worker and Toyota as an example.

But this is no small matter...is it? This whole matter of presumption. I believe something is forcing us to agree.



> He is telling you to not put words in his mouth or speak for him or think for him. You are unable to decifer his ways so don't try.
> 
> As soon as believers start to interpret the bible they are already trying to do something in which they cant


----------



## Osprey

Miguel Cervantes said:


> The interlinear Bible says otherwise.
> This and many other old testament scriptures.
> 
> http://www.biblestudytools.com/interlinear-bible/passage/?q=deuteronomy++21:22-23&t=kjv
> 
> Deuteronomy 21:22-23
> 
> From Hebrew - Transliterated to Maveth
> 
> death, dying, Death (personified), realm of the dead
> death
> death by violence (as a penalty)
> state of death, place of death



Not sure what this has to do with my post.


----------



## bullethead

Israel said:


> It would seem so, wouldn't it?
> But if one is appointed for assembly, but then further presumes ownership...well you could see where that goes, even just using a line worker and Toyota as an example.


Yes, the line worker and a fully assembled Toyota is the perfect example. All those individually assembeled parts to make complete unit. Think re-call and lemon law. 



Israel said:


> But this is no small matter...is it? This whole matter of presumption. I believe something is forcing us to agree.


It isn't forcing us to do anything.
If a god is as a god should be, that verse we agree on fits perfectly. The rest of that man made guesses, needs and hopes isn't godlike whatsoever. It is their version of what an unknowable and unable to be understood god is.
Unfortunately a lot of people get fooled in the process.

It is the god that I do not know and cannot know that is believable to me.


----------



## WaltL1

Osprey said:


> This is false. There are no Church documents that ever state this. The idea of this was taken from a time when Paulines translated scriptures into French and added many passages to fit their narrative. After finding out about the translation with the errors the Church had the translations collected and destroyed.


First, I don't claim to be a biblical scholar.
I just know I have run across the subject in my research.
I may have been thinking of this dude -


> Tyndale spent his final years in the city of Antwerp, where he revised and improved upon his New Testament and translated part of the Old. In May 1535, Tyndale was betrayed, kidnapped and imprisoned by papal agents at Vilvorde Castle near Brussels. After about 15 months' imprisonment, he was tried for heresy and condemned to death. A decade earlier they had burned the translation; now they resolved to burn the translator.
> Tyndale went boldly to the stake, still defending his belief that Englishmen should have a Bible in their own language. On 6th October 1536, he was tied to a post and strangled after which his body was burned to ashes. He died bravely, with his last crying out with a loud voice, 'Lord, open the king of England eyes!


Or -


> In Tudor England even to attempt a translation of the Bible into English was a crime, potentially punishable by death.
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p019q062


Regardless, Its a pretty well established fact that the Bible was originally not meant for the people.


----------



## Israel

bullethead said:


> Yes, the line worker and a fully assembled Toyota is the perfect example. All those individually assembeled parts to make complete unit. Think re-call and lemon law.
> 
> 
> It isn't forcing us to do anything.
> If a god is as a god should be, that verse we agree on fits perfectly. The rest of that man made guesses, needs and hopes isn't godlike whatsoever. It is their version of what an unknowable and unable to be understood god is.
> Unfortunately a lot of people get fooled in the process.
> 
> It is the god that I do not know and cannot know that is believable to me.



Is it not of note between us, that your mind goes to recall and lemon law? I intended a "one thing" in presentation and you seem to infer another. What I intended is of no matter for in raising the matter I have surely left all "of you" an open course for response. This is not beneficence, it is...simply what must be if there is communication. I am not "the better" for any sort of allowance toward you to be and see according to your will and way, the question only becomes does communication persist?

So, I do want to understand. Do you mean the assemblers may have shown a slackness in assembly, a disregard for a diligence necessary if one were to (so to speak) say they were about "making the perfect of all vehicles for use"? Nuts and bolts left off that they either couldn't handle...or found contrary and didn't want to....or were, to their minds...not necessary to completion according to their limited perception of what "the perfect vehicle ought to be"?


----------



## WaltL1

bullethead said:


> Because i have to use your ball or you won'tplay the game.
> Since you want to discuss/argue what an unknowable being knows and since you want to discuss/argue what an unhearable being says and since you want to discuss/argue what a being that is beyond your thought thinks...well, I/we gotta use the book that you base it all on to show you how corrupt, fallible, inaccurate, contradicting and blatently human the writers were that you follow instead of you following an actual god.
> 
> No need to show me more examples of what an abomination that book is welder, thats why we are discussing it in the first place.





> Since you want to discuss/argue what an unknowable being knows and since you want to discuss/argue what an unhearable being says and since you want to discuss/argue what a being that is beyond your thought thinks...


That kinda gets right to the "meat and taters" of it 
Sometimes I really don't envy the position a Christian is put in/put themselves in -
"I am commanded to spread the word so let me tell you all about the god that neither one of us can understand or comprehend".


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> That kinda gets right to the "meat and taters" of it
> Sometimes I really don't envy the position a Christian is put in/put themselves in -
> "I am commanded to spread the word so let me tell you all about the god that neither one of us can understand or comprehend".



A person who is filled with the Spirit doesn't mind being a fool for Christ.
But a person void of the Spirit, tends to say things like you and bullet just said.

It's really that simple.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> A person who is filled with the Spirit doesn't mind being a fool for Christ.
> But a person void of the Spirit, tends to say things like you and bullet just said.
> 
> It's really that simple.





> A person who is filled with the Spirit doesn't mind being a fool for Christ.


Uhh... congratulations?


> But a person void of the Spirit, tends to say things like you and bullet just said.


I would have to agree.
I guess being "void of the Spirit" is what allows us to see and point out the hit you over the head contradiction.


----------



## Israel

WaltL1 said:


> That kinda gets right to the "meat and taters" of it
> Sometimes I really don't envy the position a Christian is put in/put themselves in -
> "I am commanded to spread the word so let me tell you all about the god that neither one of us can understand or comprehend".



LOL...but that's precisely it. If I seek to make Him less of a mystery by my appearance I de facto deny the thing I ostensibly present as opening...a thing too wonderful to understand is happening. (God is making Himself known through Jesus Christ)
It appears a man may have one or the other.
Be the "right" know it all, or walk in wonder. 
To say the first is really of ether...a thing so transparently untrue...sometimes a man may have to find out about his castles in the air. No matter how real he may want them to be. Or think they are. Or attainable and attained of himself.

Truth is far more mysterious and engaging than all of our illusions about ourselves...and what we think we know. Someone recently said "absolute truth is plainly obvious" and to each of us I am sure we could show simple examples of how "true" this must be...while at the same time (if we desire to be "right") have an ample bag of ammo to dispute this.


I am not sure at all whether we all...or any of us actually understand the path we find laid out if we say "truth is". I'm sure finding there's more surprise to it than I could have ever thought, a wonder only in seeking to understand, that the depths of wonder are always revealing me at best, only on the edge of it. And here, relative positions mean nothing. They too, are a construct. Of ether.

But, that's just my $.02.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> Uhh... congratulations?
> 
> I would have to agree.
> I guess being "void of the Spirit" is what allows us to see and point out the hit you over the head contradiction.



Can you elaborate a little more on this contradiction you speak of?


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> Can you elaborate a little more on this contradiction you speak of?


Bullet has been elaborating on it for about 10 posts now.
But again the meat and taters is -


> discuss/argue what an unknowable being knows and since you want to discuss/argue what an unhearable being says and since you want to discuss/argue what a being that is beyond your thought thinks


See it?


----------



## centerpin fan

WaltL1 said:


> Regardless, Its a pretty well established fact that the Bible was originally not meant for the people.



I disagree.  The NT was written in _koine_ (not classical) Greek.  It was the common Greek spoken by the people.  Men like Tyndale were trying to give the Bible _back_ to the people after it had been taken from them.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> Bullet has been elaborating on it for about 10 posts now.
> But again the meat and taters is -
> 
> See it?



Oh. I thought you might have something more convincing than what he attempted.

All he had was "the Lamb was satan" and "God didn't know where Adam was".


----------



## WaltL1

centerpin fan said:


> I disagree.  The NT was written in _koine_ (not classical) Greek.  It was the common Greek spoken by the people.  Men like Tyndale were trying to give the Bible _back_ to the people after it had been taken from them.


There are mountains of historical evidence that the Bible was not originally intended for distribution to the people.


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> Oh. I thought you might have something more convincing than what he attempted.
> 
> All he had was "the Lamb was satan" and "God didn't know where Adam was".


I don't think you are going to be convinced by anything Welder. Which is fine. We aren't here to convince you of anything.
But we don't see the hypocrisy because we don't believe, we see it because its there.

By the way, it seems you are expecting Bullet to convince you and you are trying to convince him of something that your own beliefs tell you that you (or he) cant understand.


----------



## centerpin fan

WaltL1 said:


> There are mountains of historical evidence that the Bible was not originally intended for distribution to the people.



Nonsense.


----------



## welderguy

WaltL1 said:


> I don't think you are going to be convinced by anything Welder. Which is fine. We aren't here to convince you of anything.
> But we don't see the hypocrisy because we don't believe, we see it because its there.
> 
> By the way, it seems you are expecting Bullet to convince you and you are trying to convince him of something that your own beliefs tell you that you (or he) cant understand.



In my mind, the multiple precisely fulfilled prophecies in the bible should be more than sufficient to, at least, perk up the ears of any skeptic, spiritual or not. But that's what my mind says.


----------



## WaltL1

centerpin fan said:


> Nonsense.


Feel free to go a little further than "nonsense".


----------



## WaltL1

welderguy said:


> In my mind, the multiple precisely fulfilled prophecies in the bible should be more than sufficient to, at least, perk up the ears of any skeptic, spiritual or not. But that's what my mind says.





> In my mind





> But that's what my mind says


Your mind is not sufficient to understand. That's what the Bible says.
Your own beliefs negate your own point.


----------



## NCHillbilly

welderguy said:


> A person who is filled with the Spirit doesn't mind being a fool for Christ.
> But a person void of the Spirit, tends to say things like you and bullet just said.
> 
> It's really that simple.



Now, substitute "heroin" or "Jim Beam" for "the spirit," and your observation is just as true, and in fact, parallels nicely.



WaltL1 said:


> Uhh... congratulations?


----------



## centerpin fan

WaltL1 said:


> Feel free to go a little further than "nonsense".



I did in post 694.  Feel free to expand on this:



WaltL1 said:


> There are mountains of historical evidence that the Bible was not originally intended for distribution to the people.


----------



## WaltL1

centerpin fan said:


> I did in post 694.  Feel free to expand on this:


I'm not sure the language(s) it was written in are a deciding factor as to whether it was meant for distribution to the people.
I assume the nuclear launch codes and instructions are written in English but......


> Feel free to expand on this:


We've been through this subject before. Do a search.


----------



## gemcgrew

WaltL1 said:


> Sometimes I really don't envy the position a Christian is put in/put themselves in -
> "I am commanded to spread the word so let me tell you all about the god that neither one of us can understand or comprehend".


I have never met a Christian in this position.

Where do you find this proposition within Christian philosophy?


----------



## centerpin fan

WaltL1 said:


> I'm not sure the language(s) it was written in are a deciding factor as to whether it was meant for distribution to the people.



If it had been written in Chinese, it's not a stretch to believe it was meant for people who could read Chinese.

When Martin Luther made his translation, he did it in German because he wanted the German people to be able to read the Bible in their own language.

The language used is key in understanding the target audience.



WaltL1 said:


> We've been through this subject before. Do a search.



That was all nonsense, too.


----------



## bullethead

Israel said:


> Is it not of note between us, that your mind goes to recall and lemon law? I intended a "one thing" in presentation and you seem to infer another. What I intended is of no matter for in raising the matter I have surely left all "of you" an open course for response. This is not beneficence, it is...simply what must be if there is communication. I am not "the better" for any sort of allowance toward you to be and see according to your will and way, the question only becomes does communication persist?
> 
> So, I do want to understand. Do you mean the assemblers may have shown a slackness in assembly, a disregard for a diligence necessary if one were to (so to speak) say they were about "making the perfect of all vehicles for use"? Nuts and bolts left off that they either couldn't handle...or found contrary and didn't want to....or were, to their minds...not necessary to completion according to their limited perception of what "the perfect vehicle ought to be"?


You want to start it off as if there is a Lamborghini in a showroom somewhere and these assembly workers get to drive to see how it performs, handles, what type of fuel it likes, carefully take it apart, inspect it and reassemble it and then make an instruction manual. Actually sales brochure. 

It is more like individuals across thousands of miles all make a part to their own understanding and specifications because there is no set of blueprints to follow. These skilled craftsmen do not punch a clock or work the same shifts at the same plant. There is no plant. In fact these parts are handmade and it takes a couple thousand years by a couple hundred individuals to make enough parts that would eventually resemble a car.
Some slightly more organized small shop starts gathering all these different parts and assembles them. None of the fenders are the same but they are fenders. Each door is a different size a d a different shape but they are doors. All of the thousands of parts do not exactly fit or work together but the team at the shop use enough of what works and what sort of works together and fabricates what is missing and throws the extra on the pile out back.
Then they call it a Lamborghini. 
Outside individuals can appreciate the time and effort that went into it. The craftsmanship and skill is appreciated. The efforts and thoughts are monumental.
But it isn't  a Lambo.

The reality is that the parts resemble a car. They should be a car. They are not a car that works, runs, drives, handles or even starts. They are  various individuals best attempts at their idea of an individual part that they think should make their ultimate dream car and someone else got the idea to put them all together and start taking orders. 
The salesman are good.
Orders have been taken.
No car has yet to be delivered.

All we have is a sales brochure that talks a good game, tells us about the parts, and shows a shiny red lambo on the last page.

Many people are content thinking that one day they will drive that ultra fast, sleek, incredibly powerful car. They buy em without a test drive or so much as a peek at one sitting on the lot.

Many cars guys read the brochure, take special interest about what the claims are and what parts are used to supposedly get that performance and know that cash for clunkers wouldnt even want such a vehicle. These guys want to take it out on the highway and see what it can do.
Problem is that there isn't a showroom in the world that has has one. All the dealers keep on selling worldwide and have yet to get one in.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> A person who is filled with the Spirit doesn't mind being a fool for Christ.
> But a person void of the Spirit, tends to say things like you and bullet just said.
> 
> It's really that simple.



Self imposed titles...

Oh you are full of it alright welder.....


----------



## Israel

WaltL1 said:


> Your mind is not sufficient to understand. That's what the Bible says.
> Your own beliefs negate your own point.



The matter of contention it seems, which would not be excluded by the proposition that "God is in all ways ineffably higher", that matter is: does God _care to_(for want of a better term) make Himself known to man?

If we accept this as first statement: 

"For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways," declares the LORD. "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways And My thoughts than your thoughts(and for this it would be quite in order to accept that which immediately _at least_ precedes this)

Regardless of where one cares to start or end in quoting, the acceptance is already...that God is making Himself known. His declaration of being above, in every sense of the man to whom this is spoken, is no less a declaration about His estate in distinction to the man to whom he speaks this. God is making himself...known. And, in particular...to the man hearing this.

So, a man is either speaking of "a" god, as in "no one knows what "a" god wants, or thinks" or he speaks of this God particularly...but must be himself tripped in reason (of his own) if he believes his thoughts are now clear about "this" God...for this God is making himself known...in the very act of speaking...even (O!, so precisely) if it be "I am beyond your understanding". 

No, the believer does not lie when he says "this God that is beyond (hu)man's comprehension...is God" 

Paul, the apostle wrote:

Keep this commandment without stain or reproach until the appearance of our Lord Jesus Christ, which God will bring about in His own time — He who is blessed and the only Sovereign One, the King of kings and Lord of lords. He alone is immortal and dwells in unapproachable light. No one has ever seen Him, nor can anyone see Him. To Him be honor and eternal dominion!

Also wrote:

Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?

I am convinced he is neither stupid and forgetful writer nor liar, but true as the man who wrote this:

For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

He sees the light.


----------



## bullethead

welderguy said:


> Oh. I thought you might have something more convincing than what he attempted.
> 
> All he had was "the Lamb was satan" and "God didn't know where Adam was".



Typical welder assessment.
Read it all,  ignore the stuff that is researchable for yourself, and come away with one or two snippets.

Ps.
Those two examples came from your bible


----------



## bullethead

centerpin fan said:


> If it had been written in Chinese, it's not a stretch to believe it was meant for people who could read Chinese.
> 
> When Martin Luther made his translation, he did it in German because he wanted the German people to be able to read the Bible in their own language.
> 
> The language used is key in understanding the target audience.
> 
> 
> 
> That was all nonsense, too.



But, men in China did not write it and purposely write it in Koine Greek so that it was meant for a target audience.

Men who lived in the area where Koine Greek was spoken wrote these things and different men wrote many different things. These various writings did not magically assemble. Someone had to put them together and since the majority of the people were illiterate who was going to be able to read them? There was a purpose. 

At that time in history throughout the world there was so much writing going on by so many individuals about different gods and their versions, thoughts, and individual stories it was a major time in history. Just like people facebook and blog today on computers only back then the latest technology was a quill and ink. "The Thing" in style back then was gods and mysterious goings on.
It was nothing new or different than civilizations did a few thousand years prior and a few thousands after because the technology of the time only allowed for it to spread that slowly.
It spread so slowly because the majority of people could not read and write. 
The authors wrote for themselves.
They wrote for their beliefs. 
They wrote for their religion.
Fortunately/unfortunately those same authors that did the writing were educated by religious institutions. 
There was a slight bias


----------



## WaltL1

centerpin fan said:


> When Martin Luther made his translation, he did it in German because he wanted the German people to be able to read the Bible in their own language.
> 
> The language used is key in understanding the target audience.
> If it had been written in Chinese, it's not a stretch to believe it was meant for people who could read Chinese.
> 
> 
> That was all nonsense, too.


Lets see, so far I have used -


> Tyndale spent his final years in the city of Antwerp, where he revised and improved upon his New Testament and translated part of the Old. In May 1535, Tyndale was betrayed, kidnapped and imprisoned by papal agents at Vilvorde Castle near Brussels. After about 15 months' imprisonment, he was tried for heresy and condemned to death. A decade earlier they had burned the translation, now they intended to burn the translator.
> Tyndale went boldly to the stake, still defending his belief that Englishmen should have a Bible in their own language. On 6th October 1536, he was tied to a post and strangled after which his body was burned to ashes. He died bravely, with his last crying out with a loud voice, 'Lord, open the king of England eyes!


I'm not sure that paints the picture of an attitude of "Yes we want EVERYBODY to read to God's word".
You have contributed -


> Originally Posted by centerpin fan
> Nonsense.





> That was all nonsense, too





> If it had been written in Chinese, it's not a stretch to believe it was meant for people who could read Chinese


.
I think in the world of debate it would be "Your turn".


----------



## WaltL1

gemcgrew said:


> I have never met a Christian in this position.
> 
> Where do you find this proposition within Christian philosophy?





> I have never met a Christian in this position.


But you've met a lot who believe they are.


> Where do you find this proposition within Christian philosophy?


From Christians.


----------



## centerpin fan

Tyndale lived 1400 years after the NT was written.  You can't cite him as proof the Bible's was "not originally intended" for the common man.  I freely admit that there have been lengthy periods in church history where church authorities forbade reading or owning the Bible.  That doesn't mean, however:



WaltL1 said:


> ... that the Bible was not originally intended for distribution to the people.


----------



## bullethead

centerpin fan said:


> Tyndale lived 1400 years after the NT was written.  You can't cite him as proof the Bible's was "not originally intended" for the common man.  I freely admit that there have been lengthy periods in church history where church authorities forbade reading or owning the Bible.  That doesn't mean, however:


Unless it was all hand drawn pictures, the vast majority of it's intended audience could not read it.


----------



## centerpin fan

bullethead said:


> Unless it was all hand drawn pictures, the vast majority of it's intended audience could not read it.



True, but many could and did read it.  The ante-Nicene writings are full of Scripture quotations.


----------



## bullethead

centerpin fan said:


> True, but many could and did read it.  The ante-Nicene writings are full of Scripture quotations.



Less than 3% literacy rate in that area back in the day. It still isnt high today.
https://faculty.biu.ac.il/~barilm/illitera.html


----------



## bullethead

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/portrait/essenes.html


----------



## WaltL1

centerpin fan said:


> Tyndale lived 1400 years after the NT was written.  You can't cite him as proof the Bible's was "not originally intended" for the common man.  I freely admit that there have been lengthy periods in church history where church authorities forbade reading or owning the Bible.  That doesn't mean, however:


I didn't site him as proof.
I sited him as historical evidence. Like this -


> Decree of the Council of Toulouse (1229 C.E.): “We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books.”
> Ruling of the Council of Tarragona of 1234 C.E.: “No one may possess the books of the Old and New Testaments in the Romance language, and if anyone possesses them he must turn them over to the local bishop within eight days after promulgation of this decree, so that they may be burned...”
> Proclamations at the Ecumenical Council of Constance in 1415 C.E.: Oxford professor, and theologian John Wycliffe, was the first (1380 C.E.) to translate the New Testament into English to “...helpeth Christian men to study the Gospel in that tongue in which they know best Christ’s sentence.” For this “heresy” Wycliffe was posthumously condemned by Arundel, the archbishop of Canterbury. By the Council’s decree “Wycliffe’s bones were exhumed and publicly burned and the ashes were thrown into the Swift River.”
> Fate of William Tyndale in 1536 C.E.: William Tyndale was burned at the stake for translating the Bible into English. According to Tyndale, the Church forbid owning or reading the Bible to control and restrict the teachings and to enhance their own power and importance





> for the common man


The "common man" (laity) spoke different languages.
Which would require translation.
Which the Church forbid.


----------



## centerpin fan

WaltL1 said:


> I didn't site him as proof.
> I sited him as historical evidence. Like this -
> 
> Decree of the Council of Toulouse (1229 C.E.): “We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books.”
> 
> Ruling of the Council of Tarragona of 1234 C.E.: “No one may possess the books of the Old and New Testaments in the Romance language, and if anyone possesses them he must turn them over to the local bishop within eight days after promulgation of this decree, so that they may be burned...”
> 
> Proclamations at the Ecumenical Council of Constance in 1415 C.E.: Oxford professor, and theologian John Wycliffe, was the first (1380 C.E.) to translate the New Testament into English to “...helpeth Christian men to study the Gospel in that tongue in which they know best Christ’s sentence.” For this “heresy” Wycliffe was posthumously condemned by Arundel, the archbishop of Canterbury. By the Council’s decree “Wycliffe’s bones were exhumed and publicly burned and the ashes were thrown into the Swift River.”
> 
> Fate of William Tyndale in 1536 C.E.: William Tyndale was burned at the stake for translating the Bible into English. According to Tyndale, the Church forbid owning or reading the Bible to control and restrict the teachings and to enhance their own power and importance



For whatever reason you're citing them, you're 1100-1400 years late.  As I said before, 



centerpin fan said:


> I freely admit that there have been lengthy periods in church history where church authorities forbade reading or owning the Bible.






WaltL1 said:


> The "common man" (laity) spoke different languages.
> Which would require translation.
> Which the Church forbid.



Jerome was specifically commissioned by the pope to translate the scriptures into Latin.

Luther ignored the church and produced his German version.  He got away with it because he was protected by various German princes.  Others, like Tyndale, obviously did not.


----------



## centerpin fan

bullethead said:


> Less than 3% literacy rate in that area back in the day. It still isnt high today.
> https://faculty.biu.ac.il/~barilm/illitera.html



The early church seemed pretty literate to me: 

The Complete Ante-Nicene & Nicene and Post-Nicene Church Fathers Collection: 3 Series, 37 Volumes, 65 Authors, 1,000 Books, 18,000 Chapters, 16 Million Words

https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Ant...F8&qid=1499039921&sr=8-1&keywords=ante-Nicene


----------



## 1gr8bldr

centerpin fan said:


> The early church seemed pretty literate to me:
> 
> The Complete Ante-Nicene & Nicene and Post-Nicene Church Fathers Collection: 3 Series, 37 Volumes, 65 Authors, 1,000 Books, 18,000 Chapters, 16 Million Words
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Ant...F8&qid=1499039921&sr=8-1&keywords=ante-Nicene


That's like saying because money existed in the 1800's that everybody had plenty of it? It has caused me to ponder this though. The Nicene time period, the fight for orthodox caused a decree to burn all the writings of the opposition who lost. And for unauthorized writings to be illegal. It causes one to wonder who had these writings and why if they could not read them. Would it be the common man or churches? Constantine did issue a decree for a standardized version of the writings to be made and delivered to the churches.


----------



## bullethead

centerpin fan said:


> The early church seemed pretty literate to me:
> 
> The Complete Ante-Nicene & Nicene and Post-Nicene Church Fathers Collection: 3 Series, 37 Volumes, 65 Authors, 1,000 Books, 18,000 Chapters, 16 Million Words
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Ant...F8&qid=1499039921&sr=8-1&keywords=ante-Nicene



The early church...
Yeah I hope the people who were running that were literate. Like I said above the people involved in religious study were often the most educated.
The people outside of the church, the general population, the people who the writings were supposedly meant for..... 3 out of 100 were literate. If a thousand people were gathered, 30 of them could read and write.  300 people out of 10,000 etc etc etc.
If you based your business to sell books to 3 out of every 100 people you wouldnt do so well in those days.


----------



## Israel

The reality of Jesus Christ remains undiminished.


----------



## bullethead

Israel said:


> The reality of Jesus Christ remains undiminished.



We have guys posting links and stats and information worthy of backing up their position.

And then...
"The reality of jesus christ remains undiminished"

Wow 
Stellar


----------



## Israel

You want to make an issue of how men have handled the testimony of Jesus Christ. That's why he came, not to primarily expose deviousness, but to atone for it. But, it gets exposed along the way.


----------



## bullethead

Israel said:


> You want to make an issue of how men have handled the testimony of Jesus Christ. That's why he came, not to primarily expose deviousness, but to atone for it. But, it gets exposed along the way.



No, not at all, My issue has been consistent and clear for the entire time I've posted in here.
My issue is: guys who ramble off statements and claims should be able to back them up in order to be taken seriously and credibly.

You have Jesus touretts.
In the middle of a conversation where a few people are bombarding each other with facts you stroll by and yell Jesus Likes Oreo Cookies and everybody has to stop, look, hope this one time Izzy really has something, shake their heads  and try to get back into the groove of the actual conversation at hand.


----------



## 660griz

If I was a god, and decided to use a book to spread the word, that book could not be destroyed. When you open it, the word would be spoken to you in whatever language you could understand.
Especially, since one's eternal soul depended on it and I loved humanity, blah, blah, blah.


----------



## bullethead

660griz said:


> If I was a god, and decided to use a book to spread the word, that book could not be destroyed. When you open it, the word would be spoken to you in whatever language you could understand.
> Especially, since one's eternal soul depended on it and I loved humanity, blah, blah, blah.


That is absurd! Why be godlike?


----------



## Israel

What matter of serious and credible...to what esteems itself (and, no doubt, others) no more than talking chemicals? What is "credible" to such chemicals? Serious, to such, no less.

Ahh, but the chemicals have a diagnosis! The chemicals have determined a thing now, now not only to themselves and of themselves...but of others. Chemical exertions.

But talking chemicals are a sight, so that one could be dazzled to their attention. Like shiny things, dangling...demanding an entertainment to their approval, forswearing others. Thinking they move themselves, their will the _glue_ that binds them to themselves. Thinking they choose their attentions.

The glue. Unseen and un-sensed, till it is. The unaccountable...stuff. Mistaken for will till a man jams himself so full of it he believes nothing can unglue him. Will...will override all else. My will...will be done. And he adds and mixes with it such as he will...to the end of exerting it. Sarcasms, revilings, such clevernesses as surely cannot be withstood...by all else so dense...and numb...and dumb. The will it hopes is hidden, as invisible as glue is to the sight. But will and glue do not mix, and when in the appointed proportion both glue, and will... will be known if only by sense...of absence, and center is lost.


Jesus told a man something of the prevailing of his will in this matter of holding himself together as something of such esteem to his own sight. This delight in imagining who...and what he was....the stuff he thought he was made of. He had no idea, no notion, no inkling whatsoever...the stuff was all and only kept in place by the glue. The glue unseen, the glue over which he had no control to exert his will....to keep himself together. He despised the glue...in the esteem of himself.

A thing demanded he be surrendered to it, its delight in the blowing up of man, the fragmentation of creation to deny the truth of the unity, which is tormenting it.


Jesus said "but I have prayed for you, so that when you are converted you will turn and strengthen the brethren"


----------



## welderguy

660griz said:


> If I was a god, and decided to use a book to spread the word, that book could not be destroyed. When you open it, the word would be spoken to you in whatever language you could understand.
> Especially, since one's eternal soul depended on it and I loved humanity, blah, blah, blah.



You are describing the Word. Not the written word. But the Living Word.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

660griz said:


> If I was a god, and decided to use a book to spread the word, that book could not be destroyed. When you open it, the word would be spoken to you in whatever language you could understand.
> Especially, since one's eternal soul depended on it and I loved humanity, blah, blah, blah.



The most recent estimates are that close to 5 billion copies of the bible have been sold / distributed and it's translations have been released in over 2,100 languages / dialects. 

I think that base has been covered. I would dare bet that the "audiobooks" versions in the many languages it is available isn't even considered in this count. 

Would you like for someone to cut your steak up and feed it to you bite by bite also?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

Israel said:


> Jesus said "but I have prayed for you, so that when you are converted you will turn and strengthen the brethren"



I think (horrible way to start a sentence  ) that the above is one of the most mis-interpreted lines in the Bible. 

So many Christians take this, and other scriptures to mean, "Judge" other Christians, and when the spirit of self-righteousness consumes their ego they take it a step further and without a second thought judge everyone. 

Oh what tangled webs we weave.


----------



## bullethead

Israel said:


> What matter of serious and credible...to what esteems itself (and, no doubt, others) no more than talking chemicals? What is "credible" to such chemicals? Serious, to such, no less.
> 
> Ahh, but the chemicals have a diagnosis! The chemicals have determined a thing now, now not only to themselves and of themselves...but of others. Chemical exertions.
> 
> But talking chemicals are a sight, so that one could be dazzled to their attention. Like shiny things, dangling...demanding an entertainment to their approval, forswearing others. Thinking they move themselves, their will the _glue_ that binds them to themselves. Thinking they choose their attentions.
> 
> The glue. Unseen and un-sensed, till it is. The unaccountable...stuff. Mistaken for will till a man jams himself so full of it he believes nothing can unglue him. Will...will override all else. My will...will be done. And he adds and mixes with it such as he will...to the end of exerting it. Sarcasms, revilings, such clevernesses as surely cannot be withstood...by all else so dense...and numb...and dumb. The will it hopes is hidden, as invisible as glue is to the sight. But will and glue do not mix, and when in the appointed proportion both glue, and will... will be known if only by sense...of absence, and center is lost.
> 
> 
> Jesus told a man something of the prevailing of his will in this matter of holding himself together as something of such esteem to his own sight. This delight in imagining who...and what he was....the stuff he thought he was made of. He had no idea, no notion, no inkling whatsoever...the stuff was all and only kept in place by the glue. The glue unseen, the glue over which he had no control to exert his will....to keep himself together. He despised the glue...in the esteem of himself.
> 
> A thing demanded he be surrendered to it, its delight in the blowing up of man, the fragmentation of creation to deny the truth of the unity, which is tormenting it.
> 
> 
> Jesus said "but I have prayed for you, so that when you are converted you will turn and strengthen the brethren"



Chemicals...now that seems like something you know


----------



## bullethead

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I think (horrible way to start a sentence  ) that the above is one of the most mis-interpreted lines in the Bible.
> 
> So many Christians take this, and other scriptures to mean, "Judge" other Christians, and when the spirit of self-righteousness consumes their ego they take it a step further and without a second thought judge everyone.
> 
> Oh what tangled webs we weave.


"I think" or "I believe" or "In my opinion" are much better ways to start a sentence than declarative statements and bold claims that are never backed up.
You do a great job of providing supporting evidence. By all means carry on.


----------



## Israel

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I think (horrible way to start a sentence  ) that the above is one of the most mis-interpreted lines in the Bible.
> 
> So many Christians take this, and other scriptures to mean, "Judge" other Christians, and when the spirit of self-righteousness consumes their ego they take it a step further and without a second thought judge everyone.
> 
> Oh what tangled webs we weave.




That Jesus prayed for Peter to keep him from succumbing to the sifting? It's all that keeps me.

But, if it means something other than that, that we are indeed kept by an interceding High Priest, I'd be interested to hear.


----------



## 660griz

Miguel Cervantes said:


> The most recent estimates are that close to 5 billion copies of the bible have been sold / distributed and it's translations have been released in over 2,100 languages / dialects.
> 
> I think that base has been covered. I would dare bet that the "audiobooks" versions in the many languages it is available isn't even considered in this count.
> 
> Would you like for someone to cut your steak up and feed it to you bite by bite also?



Man's word, all left to interpretation.
I am looking for actual God's word.

As long as they don't cut my steak and feed me chicken. Sure.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

Israel said:


> That Jesus prayed for Peter to keep him from succumbing to the sifting? It's all that keeps me.



Yes, but in the finishing of the statement in that Scripture "*Strenghten* your Brothers." Should be interpreted "lift up" IMHO. 

From the transliterated word in that verse:

Storizo - (sthrivzw)

1 - to make stable, place firmly, set fast, fix
2 - to strengthen, make firm
3 - to render constant, confirm, one's mind

Whom do we consider our brother / brethren?

Again, from the same source.

Adelphos - (ajdelfovß)

1 - a brother, whether born of the same two parents or only of the same father or mother
2 - having the same national ancestor, belonging to the same people, or countryman
3 - any fellow or man
3 - a fellow believer, united to another by the bond of affection
4 - an associate in employment or office
5 - brethren in Christ
his brothers by blood
all men
apostles
Christians, as those who are exalted to the same heavenly place

No judgement required or even stated. Given the definition there are many interpretations of whom we should consider our brethren. 

Given the Greatest Commandment of all, the definition narrows considerably to the letters in red. Does it not?


----------



## Israel

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Yes, but in the finishing of the statement in that Scripture "*Strenghten* your Brothers." Should be interpreted "lift up" IMHO.
> 
> From the transliterated word in that verse:
> 
> Storizo - (sthrivzw)
> 
> 1 - to make stable, place firmly, set fast, fix
> 2 - to strengthen, make firm
> 3 - to render constant, confirm, one's mind
> 
> Whom do we consider our brother / brethren?
> 
> Again, from the same source.
> 
> Adelphos - (ajdelfovß)
> 
> 1 - a brother, whether born of the same two parents or only of the same father or mother
> 2 - having the same national ancestor, belonging to the same people, or countryman
> 3 - any fellow or man
> 3 - a fellow believer, united to another by the bond of affection
> 4 - an associate in employment or office
> 5 - brethren in Christ
> his brothers by blood
> all men
> apostles
> Christians, as those who are exalted to the same heavenly place
> 
> No judgement required or even stated. Given the definition there are many interpretations of whom we should consider our brethren.
> 
> Given the Greatest Commandment of all, the definition narrows considerably to the letters in red. Does it not?



Do you like the Lord's perfect efficiency?

and

Is there something in any of what you write that is in response to the perceived implication that the one to whom this was addressed...is seen as less than brother?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

Israel said:


> Do you like the Lord's perfect efficiency?
> 
> and
> 
> Is there something in any of what you write that is in response to the perceived implication that the one to whom this was addressed...is seen as less than brother?



I love and depend on His perfect efficiency, understanding that all happens in His time, not mine.

In so much as chronological events are concerned and who they were about, I care not so much about the when or who as I do the Post-effect of the outcome of the lessens taught and who they apply to moving forward.

Was Eshu addressing only Simon on that matter at that point in time? or was it a lesson for us all to draw from and to be applied to the boundaries, or rather lack thereof when implementing the Great Commandment?


----------



## Israel

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I love and depend on His perfect efficiency, understanding that all happens in His time, not mine.
> 
> In so much as chronological events are concerned and who they were about, I care not so much about the when or who as I do the Post-effect of the outcome of the lessens taught and who they apply to moving forward.
> 
> Was Eshu addressing only Simon on that matter at that point in time? or was it a lesson for us all to draw from and to be applied to the boundaries, or rather lack thereof when implementing the Great Commandment?



Then the lesson remains for all to all...it is not what a man says he is, or will do, or imagines he is...in the Lord's presence. For all is open and laid bare before Him with whom we have to do.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes

Israel said:


> Then the lesson remains for all to all...it is not what a man says he is, or will do, or imagines he is...in the Lord's presence. For all is open and laid bare before Him with whom we have to do.



I'm pretty sure that was my point, in not so many words.


----------



## TripleXBullies

Some things NEVER change.... 

I think about you guys a lot. All of you in here. In church the other morning God moved me with Exodus 14:14. The second part of it. Be still. Be Quiet.. there are other translations. 

Obviously this is my opinion of what goes on here in this forum... As far as people here go, JB had the most influence on my opinion of the crazy  (I say that from a before and after perspective lol) Christians here. Logical discussions are completely lost here. The first two As present what is very logical and someone claiming to be the third A brings back everything but logic, which is all the first two want to hear. YEARS later, it's all exactly the same conversation. 

Be still. Be Quiet. I feel like I almost agree with Welder that you'll believe when God helps you believe. When you're really ready, he'll give you what you need. The old timer first two As aren't going to be convinced with logic. 2 and a half years after changing my mind I still feel like the third As make absolutely no sense at all.......

That doesn't mean stop talking. It doesn't mean do nothing...It means stop trying to hard, especially with an attempt at logic.


----------



## ambush80

TripleXBullies said:


> Some things NEVER change....
> 
> I think about you guys a lot. All of you in here. In church the other morning God moved me with Exodus 14:14. The second part of it. Be still. Be Quiet.. there are other translations.
> 
> Obviously this is my opinion of what goes on here in this forum... As far as people here go, JB had the most influence on my opinion of the crazy  (I say that from a before and after perspective lol) Christians here. Logical discussions are completely lost here. The first two As present what is very logical and someone claiming to be the third A brings back everything but logic, which is all the first two want to hear. YEARS later, it's all exactly the same conversation.
> 
> Be still. Be Quiet. I feel like I almost agree with Welder that you'll believe when God helps you believe. When you're really ready, he'll give you what you need. The old timer first two As aren't going to be convinced with logic. 2 and a half years after changing my mind I still feel like the third As make absolutely no sense at all.......
> 
> That doesn't mean stop talking. It doesn't mean do nothing...It means stop trying to hard, especially with an attempt at logic.



How you been X?

To the part in blue:  Absolutely incorrect.  I could be convinced by logical argument or evidence to believe in God (not likely the Christian God because of the crazy book) and so could Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris.  

What do you think about freewill?  Can it exist simultaneously with an omniscient God?


----------



## TripleXBullies

Good ambush, how about you?  

You aren't going to be convinced with the logic that is provide-able in this case. The kind of logic you'd want to see/hear for this doesn't exist.

It's a tough question. I don't have a good answer to that, or the question that hillbilly is asking, how God supposedly created the system we are in where we need his forgiveness. I don't have it all.


----------



## ambush80

TripleXBullies said:


> Good ambush, how about you?
> 
> You aren't going to be convinced with the logic that is provide-able in this case. The kind of logic you'd want to see/hear for this doesn't exist.
> 
> It's a tough question. I don't have a good answer to that, or the question that hillbilly is asking, how God supposedly created the system we are in where we need his forgiveness. I don't have it all.



I'm well, thanks.  How's that new family of yours?  I hope they're bringing you lots of joy.

A fairly mundane miracle would do the trick.

As long as it keeps workin' for ya (and doesn't cause you to do anything irrational).


----------



## TripleXBullies

Yes. A fairly mundane miracle. And that doesn't come from an attempt by anyone to make their faith in to a logical argument.  You don't see it like I do but I've told y'all before that's what I got - a fairly mundane miracle. It was the miracle I needed.


----------



## ambush80

TripleXBullies said:


> Yes. A fairly mundane miracle. And that doesn't come from an attempt by anyone to make their faith in to a logical argument.  You don't see it like I do but I've told y'all before that's what I got - a fairly mundane miracle. It was the miracle I needed.




I understand the "***** in the heart".  I was in a tough place recently and I experimented with my thoughts.  I called upon God.  I called upon many Gods and they all answered.  I found comfort and strength and forgiveness.  There's great utility in the belief in the power of God(s) but it's not like the utility that can be had from belief in gravity.  Right tool for the right job.


----------



## TripleXBullies

When I was thinking through the illustration I gave in my 'conversion' thread last year I thought about how I am the kind of person that thinks about things in a concrete way. I put my experience in to a story using a comparison with a literal wall. I think that's what has made my faith so much of an issue over the years. It's completely anti-concrete. That's pretty difficult to deal with. Gravity on the other hand... not hard to deal with.


----------



## ambush80

Not everything is concrete.  Some things are mysterious and seemingly ethereal like consciousness.  Though one can manipulate the physical material, where consciousness seems to originate from, either with medical procedures or chemically, one can also use the spooky properties of consciousness on itself as well.


----------



## Israel

ambush80 said:


> Not everything is concrete.  Some things are mysterious and seemingly ethereal like consciousness.  Though one can manipulate the physical material, where consciousness seems to originate from, either with medical procedures or chemically, one can also use the spooky properties of consciousness on itself as well.



How conscious...is conscious?

Awake...to what?

"Getting through the night" could be discovered to have more to do with what is embraced "through the day" where affections may submit themselves to some ordering in light so that even the most unwelcome of once night terrors are even understood as most precious.

Something there was in that "getting lost dream", that "being abducted dream", that "relentlessly being chased dream" that was speaking to _a something_.

I am going to see if I can track this down for you, if only because you have been made someone who invades my consciousness. We have been in a communication despite what appearances may seek to make of a true thing "it's just a freaking chat forum for goodness' sake!" 

No, we have been drawing one another, making sketches of one another exchanged to one another for a few years now. And, giving away ourselves, even if only by letters, of one another.

It was a remarkable dream, so much so, that at the time I had the sense to share it with my daughter, so I know it's written somewhere...probably way back in a facebook message.

But the substance of it was simple. The particulars of the exact exchange. for whatever reason, don't easily come to mind.

In the dream there was the "me" that is me...in dream. But a man asked me a riddle, it was a seemingly silly one, made in a house by a staircase. Nevertheless he asked me something that on its face was plainly curious. The "I" in the dream, from the curious perspective we have in dream of perception that seems to speak of the "me" watching it, simply said, "I don't know" in response to the riddle. Then he went on to answer it "to me" in a sense that made "perfect" sense to the "me" in the dream. 

Of course awakening I was kinda dumbfounded. How could I "not know" (and the riddle was very playful, almost a joke) an answer to a thing in a dream that "I" was peopling? How could this be? For I truly (for the life of me) could not see how or where the answer that came, came from.

It was not "spooky" to me at all, but quite hilariously understood, at the time. And recalling it remains so.

You probably know about the snake eating its tail and the benzene ring dream. I have seen your engagement with Sam Harris' considerations of consciousness, and listened for a bit to some of his speaking you have recommended. How that "the science" is making a thing so once obscure...a bit more plain. "Things" are bubbling up from a place where will and choice (as previously perceived and understood) have little, if any, relevance.

But this matter of consciousness is all I have ever heard Jesus Christ speak of, not as investigator or "discoverer/explorer" but as authoritative guide. "Knower" of consciousness. "Out of the heart proceeds" He says.

That he has been made into a caricature of sorts (at least to me, and perhaps to you also)..."spooky", well, I don't believe for a moment that is one of the sketches he would submit to. Indeed, I don't believe he submits to any. 

Images have a great deal of power. I think we might both see that to some extent. Graven ones...and imagined ones. That may, in time, be transferred to the concrete. But regardless, they remain only ..._images._

"The truth is out there"...but also, I am hilariously convinced, a lot closer than _we think_.


----------



## SemperFiDawg

TripleXBullies said:


> When I was thinking through the illustration I gave in my 'conversion' thread last year I thought about how I am the kind of person that thinks about things in a concrete way. I put my experience in to a story using a comparison with a literal wall. I think that's what has made my faith so much of an issue over the years. It's completely anti-concrete. That's pretty difficult to deal with. Gravity on the other hand... not hard to deal with.



TXB  I took a hiatus from here also a while back and missed your conversion thread completely.  Went back and found it yesterday and read it.  It was inspirational.  Thanks for posting it.   Is it too much to ask for you to kinda give a summation of your life since.  If so I will understand.  Mainly curious since your walk began with a small miracle, if you have continued to experience those.  I have, and I'm sure there's many more that happen in my life that I just don't take the time or have the time to acknowledge.


----------



## TripleXBullies

SemperFiDawg said:


> TXB  I took a hiatus from here also a while back and missed your conversion thread completely.  Went back and found it yesterday and read it.  It was inspirational.  Thanks for posting it.   Is it too much to ask for you to kinda give a summation of your life since.  If so I will understand.  Mainly curious since your walk began with a small miracle, if you have continued to experience those.  I have, and I'm sure there's many more that happen in my life that I just don't take the time or have the time to acknowledge.



Ask and ye shall receive. It's been resurrected.


----------

