Really? What the... The entire point of the post wasn't to argue the concepts of moving from old to new testament. How about the point being made by the entire post (which was a response to someone who thinks God can do and be good or evil or w/e He wants b/c he's the final boss - while we must not sin, do the wrong thing, you know?
ELECT Sinners In The Hands Of An Angry God
- Thread starter 7djengo7
- Start date
Really? What the... The entire point of the post wasn't to argue the concepts of moving from old to new testament. How about the point being made by the entire post (which was a response to someone who thinks God can do and be good or evil or w/e He wants b/c he's the final boss - while we must not sin, do the wrong thing, you know?
What?
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
I know that's a popular phrase to throw about but what exactly is it supposed to represent? That the likelihood of impending mortality equates to belief? I think that most people when confronted with that would certainly hope that there was something beyond but that's rather different.
The Bible states very plainly, as in a matter of fact, that everyone knows God exists. It's taught to be self evident, and I think it's coming from a general, natural standpoint rather than specifically the Abrahamic god- to know Him, you have to be elected into the Kingdom.
But to know that there is a maker is something we are born assuming. The animals know it, all life knows it- you rather have to be skeptical and 'un-know' it before proclaiming to be agnostic and even then God still whispers to the soul.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Guess I missed your point, didn't I?
Rosenritter
New member
For clarification, do you mean:
a) "How can someone be faulted for choosing wrongly?"
b) "How can someone be faulted for guessing wrongly?"
The word choose implies that a choice is being made between one thing and another, as if these things are known. The word guess implies that the choices themselves are not properly known or that there is insufficient information for the choice.
It is common sense that if someone knows the good and chooses evil they can certainly be faulted: they knew what both options were and entailed and they knowingly chose the evil. If this is mutually understood, does your question actually mean "How can they be faulted for guessing wrongly?"
glorydaz
Well-known member
No, it means it takes some people being brought to their knees through outside circumstances before they even consider calling on their creator. When a person is laying in the gutter having lost everything, he just might begin to look UP. That's my point. Hope being the first stage of seeking God.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
Hey, there you are! I see you're still trying to fill your time with more meaningless, juvenile-delinquent behavior, rather than by trying to answer the questions I asked you. Remember my post, #614, in the thread, The Gospel Proper, where I asked you
You take Jesus literally when He says "Whosoever eateth my flesh", yet you refuse to take Paul literally when he says "For as often as ye eat this bread".
When are you going to answer the question? Oh, that's right, you can't answer it without further manifesting your irrationality and hypocrisy.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Before you begin your scolding, Rosen, you need to make sure you aren't falsely accusing someone of saying what someone else said, OR what you understood them to say. I said, "We all know that God exists", and then I proceeded to quote a couple of verses, Romans 1:19-20 which say what is plainly understood by "the things that are made". That is undoubtedly where you got the "so obvious, and that anyone could see it," part...which you then blamed someone else for saying. This is why you need to put quotes around what you are claiming someone said, so you can be called on your errors.
Yeah, "Maybe..." :chuckle:
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
When you say "I don't know that God exists," are you referring, by the word 'God', to what Christians are referring to, by the word 'God', when we say "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth", or are you not?
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
Obviously, your sentiment is trash. However, I'll give you a little compliment, here, by admitting that there's a little bit of comic cleverness in your remark. Made me chuckle a bit. :thumb:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Some people take the "suicide option" at that point also. I don't think it's an effective or productive phrase but just a soundbite in essence.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Didn't say it was productive....simply stating a fact.
joeyarnoldvn
New member
God might be angry. But there is a good anger and a bad anger.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
It's . . . not. Yours is. You're a Troll. You're going to flame out soon, and before that hopefully you'll compose a song for us.
Hopefully, you won't flame out, and you'll stop being a troll. That's up to you, ultimately, but I'll do what I can to assist.
I am rooting for you.
I know. Your arguing is excellent---excellent. Sharp mind. You've got the wrong theology though. There were others, many others, who believed in our Lord as fervently as we do. Some of them lived so near in time to the Events, that they either met one of the Apostles, or they knew someone who met one of the Apostles. As the Gospel spread, the Apostles were like proverbial rock stars, except that people Threw rocks at them. We get to peak in the window, just a peak, which is plenty to establish certain 'big picture' matters, like did the earliest Church consist of both Jews and Pagans? Yes. Was it life-threatening to be a Christian generally, and especially to be a bishop? Yes. What about baptism, was that with water? And were infants ever baptized? Yes, Yes. These types of things are easy to discern even from so far away in time as today.
So your view has this early, early Church, in her infancy, so close to Christ that they knew how the Apostles smelled, the aroma that their bodies typically emitted, because they had met them, they had known them, they had known people who met and who knew them. And the Apostles knew JESUS.
You have these people Immediately 'fouling' it up. You're the same as the unitariards in this regard---they talk like you; you talk like them. How, could they get it So Wrong, so soon? If it were scripted, I would characterize the story as a comedy. This is what your view, the unitariards, and a lot of other just recently Made Up Christian traditions and theologies, have on the early Church; 'the book' on the early Church is that it was administrated by clowns, holding clown offices, at some point along the way wearing clown costumes, because the office/role is, Clowns. And the Church is nothing but sober as a judge, when it comes to clowning around. This is what you have to think, because if there weren't actual clowns involved, how did she go So Wrong so soon after the Apostles departed this earth?
It's got to be clowns. 'No other option.
Unsurprised. Why do you think I know that? It's not just certain words users use, even certain word combinations, and where they put the quotation marks wrt periods and commas and other punctuation, that you can learn from them, just by being observant. It's even deeper, you can tease out their sense of humor as well, not because they're revealing it on purpose, but because they've accidentally let enough out to put together the picture.
I'm just jerking your chain. I had no idea that was funny. I just was responding to an earlier post, rather than the other one you laid for me, like an egg.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Righteous anger/indignation, and immoral anger/rage (one of the 'seven' deadlies).
Animals don't know anything. I did not start out knowing anything about it or having even a feeling; doubt I'm the only one.
Is it possible to knowingly choose evil while having the same understanding as someone who doesn't make that same mistake?
Yes, but also applies to any sort of Supreme Being.
Rosenritter
New member
Yes.
Since the entire context of "choosing good and evil" is within the scriptural context, may I use a scriptural example? Wouldn't it be safe to assume that both Cain and Abel had the same understanding of God and the world around them as one another? One chose anger and murder, the other was slain and declared righteous.
Ezekiel 33 also has a very relevant section: the righteous that turns from his way shall perish, but the wicked that turns from his way shall live. It is possible for one who is righteous to change and choose evil, and it is possible for one who is wicked to change and choose righteousness.
Ezekiel 33:14-16 KJV
(14) Again, when I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; if he turn from his sin, and do that which is lawful and right;
(15) If the wicked restore the pledge, give again that he had robbed, walk in the statutes of life, without committing iniquity; he shall surely live, he shall not die.
(16) None of his sins that he hath committed shall be mentioned unto him: he hath done that which is lawful and right; he shall surely live.