Yo yo forgiveness?

[benherndon]

LHC, could you be more pointed in what your comments mean. I'm not getting the thrust of what you are saying.

"Commandments" in 1 John 3 are not referring to the Ten Commandments. Or, do you think they do?

If you think Isa 58 should apply to the Christian, then you must mean that all of Jer 17 also applies to the Christian. Right? I'm sorry but the NT makes those instructions be upstaged by what Christ and Paul and others wrote in the NT.

The times and the situation has changed from when Isa 58 was written.

I agree Isa 9 is a prophecy of a 'Child' coming to Galilee of the Gentiles who will head the government and occupy the throne of David---this was just a sketchy glimpse---and that's what the Jews were looking for--but they didn't recognize Him when He came, did they? So what does your commments have to do with my comments about the NT being THE way to live the Christian life?

I'm sorry but I guess I just don't get your applications. Surely you know what your posts say to you.... but its not plain to me what you are saying without further more specific elaboration.

Please develop your thoughts and the exceptions to what I've said more specifically. Thanks.

Or, could somebody else explain to me what is on the mind of LHC in response to my post?

Ben

[benherndon]

Quote:

---

Norman said:

Hi Ben,

I was actually planning on dropping by you place this w/e and hashing this out.

Take care my brother and have a blessed Sabbath.

Norman

---

>>>My cell phone # is 1-951-833-4730----I'll be expecting a call. Would be just delighted to hear you will be here.

Do you know Jack Gent MD in Tunnel Hill, GA, near Calhoun?

Ben

[cardw]

Quote:

---

I have had my life changed by reading the Bible. It has been my greatest source of getting to know my Father and my Brother, Jesus. You don't seem to believe in the Bible as God's inspired word and method of communication to His created beings, us.

---

I have no doubt that the spirit can use all things to communicate with us. I believe that all things speak to us if we listen. I don't find good evidence that the Bible has any greater ability than other methods of communication.

Quote:

---

If that is the case, how can there ever be any agreement in spiritual matters with you and those who believe in the Bible?

---

We don't have to agree to love one another. I believe that each person is on their own path and within the dialog there are opportunities for us all.

Quote:

---

I haven't been in CA for too long but if what I said is true it must be difficult for you to have doctrinal discussions, I mean it must be frustrating for you.

---

I'm not really looking for agreement and I am not concerned with doctrine. Doctrine, to me, is simply a form of rationalism. It might be interesting to debate and analyze, but I find little spiritual use for it. Spirituality, to me, resides much deeper than the mind and thoughts.

Quote:

---

Just out of curiousity, has anyone ever said anythng to you to make you want to reconsider your beliefs?

---

I reconsider my beliefs every time I enter into a dialog. And I expect my beliefs to always change as I find out more and experience growth.

[cardw]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The destruction of New Orleans nothing but the result of natural disaster & has no spiritual significance? Dream on, Richard.

---

I happen to believe that is what the AUTHORS of the Bible believed. I find it very hard to believe that an all powerful, intelligent God would come up with those types of immature solutions. They are also contradictory to Jesus' teachings of abandoning violence as a solution for justice and reconciliation.

Quote:

---

You won't find one Bible author holding or endorsing that notion.

---

---

Let us say that God destroyed New Orleans because they were not obeying. Now the terrorists claim that God gave them the power to destroy the Twin Towers in New York and yet we condemn the terrorists for acting immorally and it is quite clear that the wickedness in New York would at least be equal to the wickedness in New Orleans.

How can we condemn the terrorists and yet not condemn God?

What gives God the moral right to judge us?

Did we choose to be born on this planet? Did we choose to have a sinful nature? At what point are we responsible?

[Gerr]

Quote:

---

cardw said:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The destruction of New Orleans nothing but the result of natural disaster & has no spiritual significance? Dream on, Richard.

---

I happen to believe that is what the AUTHORS of the Bible believed. I find it very hard to believe that an all powerful, intelligent God would come up with those types of immature solutions. They are also contradictory to Jesus' teachings of abandoning violence as a solution for justice and reconciliation.

Quote:

---

You won't find one Bible author holding or endorsing that notion.

---

---

Let us say that God destroyed New Orleans because they were not obeying. Now the terrorists claim that God gave them the power to destroy the Twin Towers in New York and yet we condemn the terrorists for acting immorally and it is quite clear that the wickedness in New York would at least be equal to the wickedness in New Orleans.

How can we condemn the terrorists and yet not condemn God?

What gives God the moral right to judge us?

Did we choose to be born on this planet? Did we choose to have a sinful nature? At what point are we responsible?

---

[:"blue"]Unfortunately, the Bible is not always as clear to me when it IS God who is doing the destroying [as in the Flood, Sodom/Gomorrah], or as when He is merely withdrawing His protection and allowing the destroyer, i.e. Satan, to do his evil work [e.g. Job, Assyrian captivity of the northern kingdom, Babylonian captivity of the southern kingdom].

There is a universe of difference between the terrorist acting as judge & executioner, and the God of the universe who, as the one who has to maintain moral order in His creation, has to act as Judge & enforcer of moral order, because disorder results in chaos, suffering, & destruction.

It used to bother me that I had no choice in being born polluted by this moral cesspool we're in, until I realized that God had provided a way out of which I had nothing to do with either. Bottomline - it boils down to a choice. Accept the way things are of which we had nothing to do with, or accept the way out provided, of which we had nothing to do with either.

BTW, show us that one Bible author that tells us no one will be lost or that everyone will be saved. [/]

Gerry

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Gerry Cabalo said:

Unfortunately, the Bible is not always as clear to me when it IS God who is

doing the destroying

[as in the Flood, Sodom/Gomorrah], or as when He is merely withdrawing His protection and allowing the

destroyer

, i.e. Satan, to do his evil work

---

"Now the Valley of Siddim was full of asphalt ['bitumen,' RSV] pits" (Genesis 14:10), suggesting some type of igneous activity occurring within the earth's crust. Today "the shores around the Dead Sea are covered with lava, sulfur, and rock salt. Gases escape from the surface of the water" (World Book Encyclopedia, 1954, Vol. 4, p. 1891).

Note the existence in this scenario of all the ingredients necessary to destroy these cities in a great fiery conflagration. Bitumen, asphalt, oil, gas even salt to turn Lot's wife into a pillar.

Another name for "brimstone," which Scripture says God "rained" upon these cities is sulfur, a major export of this region today. One need only consider the swiftness with which the ancient city of Pompeii met its doom via volcano to know something similar could have happened to these cities in such a volatile location.

The devastation of Sodom and Gomorrah created a legend for centuries. Like Shiloh, the fate of those cities became an object lesson to Israel.

How God Destroyed the Cities?

• "Jerusalem stumbled, and Judah is fallen . . . They declare their sin as Sodom; they do not hide it. Woe to their soul! [:"red"]For they have brought evil upon themselves"[/] (Isaiah 3:8,9).

Most revealing, however, is a familiar reference often quoted to depict the pain God feels at the death of sinners.

• How can I give you up Ephraim? How can I hand you over, Israel? How can I make you like Admah? How can I set you like Zeboiim? My heart churns within Me. My sympathy is stirred. (Hosea 11:8)

God uses the name Ephraim as a generic term in the same way He sometimes uses the name Judah, to denote an entire population. No writer could more poignantly portray God's distress at the thought of "handing over" or "giving up" the nation to destruction, as He would one day deliver up the Sin-bearer to redeem a lost race. He compares such a prospect to the time He gave up and handed over Admah and Zeboiim.

Deuteronomy 29:23 and Genesis 14:2,8 give the names of all four cities destroyed when God poured fire upon the Cities of the Plain: Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim. According to Hosea, then, these last two cities, and by implication, Sodom and Gomorrah with them, were handed over and given up to destruction.

The depravity of these cities has become legendary, even down to our time. One city, Sodom, has lent its name to a practice clearly abhorrent to God, as evidenced by a number of Scriptural passages, among them Romans 2. The context shows that the apostle Paul understood "the wrath of God" to mean His reluctant departure from those whose ways show loyalty to the kingdom of darkness. Paul in Romans 2 speaks of those whom God gave up "to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. . . ." and "God gave them over" to the natural and inevitable consequences of their behavior. Paul's remarks in Romans 2 address a problem dating "from the creation of the world," clearly including the era of the Cities of the Plain.

Nor does this exhaust the Biblical evidence that God released these cities to destruction rather than personally executing that destruction. Deuteronomy 29:23-28 strongly supports the "Release" position.

God depicts Himself as doing what He does not prevent. As in the case of His own Son, the Sin-bearer, He simply ceased to protect, and the result? release into the hands of destruction. Thus with Sodom.

[cardw]

Quote:

---

There is a universe of difference between the terrorist acting as judge & executioner, and the God of the universe who, as the one who has to maintain moral order in His creation, has to act as Judge & enforcer of moral order, because disorder results in chaos, suffering, & destruction.

---

How is the destruction of New Orleans maintaining moral order? In fact, rather than order we saw chaos on a much larger scale. I fail to see how, God allowing Satan to destroy everything, could be considered order.

If my child tries to run in front of a car and if it is within my power to stop them, no matter how rebellious they may be, if I allow them to run into the street, it is my fault if they are struck by the car. If I can see that with my child, why would God be so immature as to use the threat of death with his children?

And the distance between God and us, in terms of maturity, is so far greater than the distance between me and my child. How could God be any less wise and understanding that it is often ignorance and fear that fuel rebellion, not evil intent. The reason Love is so powerful is that it provides an understanding and experience of being valued. And when one experiences that sense, the fear and the ignorance go away on a level that is far deeper than these simplistic, punitive, views of some easily offended god.

Quote:

---

Unfortunately, the Bible is not always as clear to me when it IS God who is doing the destroying [as in the Flood, Sodom/Gomorrah], or as when He is merely withdrawing His protection and allowing the destroyer, i.e. Satan, to do his evil work [e.g. Job, Assyrian captivity of the northern kingdom, Babylonian captivity of the southern kingdom].

---

This is what I mean. This is THEIR opinion of what God is like. That God is withdrawing protection. I did not mean to say that the Bible says everyone will be saved.

When these large scale events occur the human mind often needs some sort of answer as to why these thing happen. I happen to believe that the Bible is often attempting to bring some sort of order to these events. This is the function of mythology, and it is not a bad thing, unless we begin to worship a particular explanation. All explanations break down to paradox. This is because a human intellectual explanation will never be able to encompass the complexity of reality. The Bible is held by this same limitation because it is in the form of language. And when we begin to apply literal solutions to an artistic text, we begin to form these childish versions of some simple minded god.

The only bridge we have is those moments when a deeper experience, beyond words and explanations, comes into our awareness. If we are taught that we are not capable of these or that the answers come from theology, doctrine, and all other experiences are deceptions of the devil, we are pretty much prisoners of our own inability to explain.

That is the place that I am coming from.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

If my child tries to run in front of a car and if it is within my power to stop them, no matter how rebellious they may be, if I allow them to run into the street, it is my fault if the car strikes them.

---

We differ a bit here, I think...

Let's step up your analogy just a bit more. Let's say your child is a mature adult...he has reached the age of accountability/reason. Should you force your moral authority on him?

What if your "child" is engaged in a high level of unprotected sexual activity...are you going to imprison him in your endeavors to "protect" his health? What lengths will you go to "to save his soul"?

God says, "My thoughts are not your thoughts, Neither 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."

God's love is diametrically opposed to our human love. Human love is self-seeking...it loves those who love back. It will do all sort of atrocities in the name of "love."

But there is no compulsion in God's agape love. You have the right to choose...you have the right to persistently force God out of your life. So then, when at last God perceives one has fully and completely said get out of my life...God, being love, must leave. With Him goes His protection.

This can be clearly seen with Israel....God loved Israel more than Himself, yet His people persistently rejected His love....They rejected His Son and so God had to abandoned Israel to their choice. What was the result? Did God send in the Romans to crucify His beloved people once they were starved out side the walls of the city? Why didn't God just "force" them to see it His way?

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Robert said:

This can be clearly seen with Israel....God loved Israel more than Himself, yet His people persistently rejected His love....They rejected His Son and so God had to abandoned Israel to their choice. What was the result? Did God send in the Romans to crucify His beloved people once they were starved out side the walls of the city? Why didn't God just "force" them to see it His way?

---

Matt 23:37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, [:"red"]but you were not willing.[/]

Matt 24:15 “Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place [outside the gates of Jerusalem](let the reader understand), 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains; 17 let him who is on the housetop not go down to get the things out that are in his house; 18 and let him who is in the field not turn back to get his cloak. 19 “But woe to those who are with child and to those who nurse babes in those days! 20 “But pray that your flight may not be in the winter, or on the Sabbath; 21 for then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall."

The nation of Israel rejected God...but some Jews accepted Christ as their protector and righteousness. These believers escaped the coming calamity brought on by the Romans....

Once day this nation will reject the gospel....They will reject the truth as it is "in Christ". They will abandon every principle of the constitution and seek to shut the mouths of those who present the gospel of Jesus Christ.

• By the decree of enforcing the institution of the Papacy in violation of the law of God, our nation will disconnect herself fully from righteousness.

What doctrine does Roman teach that perverts the truth as it is “in Christ”? Right…the heresy of “The Immaculate Conception.” This heresy rejects that Christ came in the flesh to save mankind from under the curse of the law. If Christ didn’t actually legally save us, then we must save ourselves. Hence this nation will reject the gospel. This is willful unbelief….

• When Protestantism shall stretch her hand across the gulf to grasp the hand of the Roman power, when she shall reach over the abyss to clasp hands with Spiritualism , when, under the influence of this threefold union, our country shall repudiate every principle of its Constitution as a Protestant and Republican government, and shall make provision for the propagation of papal falsehoods and delusions, then we may know that the time has come for the marvelous working of Satan, and that the end is near.

Two Roman Catholic heresies will deny the gospel [actually three, but that's another subject]:

1] The Immaculate Conception

2] The immortality of the soul.

The first denies the gospel…the good news that “in Christ” God has legally redeemed the world from under the curse of the law.

The second rejects that mankind is sinful. If something good exists in me after death, then part of me must be righteous. This heresy rejects mankind’s utter sinfulness and selfishness.

The third will be the rejection of the Sabbath as a sign of God's full and complete redemption "in Christ Jesus." The future issue of the Sabbath will be a sign of justification by faith vs. Sunday that will then be sign of legalistic righteousness.....

One is man's day symbolizing self-righteousness...and God's Sabbath symbolizing God's complete work of saving the human race in His Son Jesus Christ...the Son of Man and the Son of God.

Rob

[Robert]

Oh yeah...one other thing....

Two groups will emerge during the time of trouble.

One group will be completely given over to "self"....They love their lives and they want you dead....Thus they will reflect Lucifer’s principle of self fully!

The 2nd group, God's remnant, will be fully reflecting Christ's selfless agape love....They loved not their lives even unto death. Here we see sinless living in sinful flesh. It is not the means of their salvation, rather it's the bride fully grown up....She is reflecting God's love.

I believe God just illuminated my mind with a theological struggle ....I've always wonder if God's remnant would ever fully reflect his love this side of eternity. I think I just got the answer....Yes!

Now look at the similarities....Jesus was so selfless that He didn't have a place to lay His head....He loved not His life unto death....

The remnant will have lost it all....All earthliness is gone. They will be homeless just like Christ. They are homeless because like Christ they are not self-seeking....And like Christ they are willing to say goodbye to life forever so that their enemies can have their place....

Ah, but there's good news:

• Soon there appears in the east a small black cloud, about half the size of a man's hand. It is the cloud which surrounds the Saviour, and which seems in the distance to be shrouded in darkness. The people of God know this to be the sign of the Son of man. In solemn silence they gaze upon it as it draws nearer the earth, becoming lighter and more glorious, until it is a great white cloud, its base a glory like consuming fire, and above it the rainbow of the covenant. Jesus rides forth as a mighty conqueror, and the armies of Heaven follow him….Before him every face turns pale, and upon those whom God has rejected, falls the blackness of despair. The righteous [just] cry with trembling, "Who shall be able to stand?" The song of the angels ceases, and there is a period of awful silence. Then the voice of Jesus is heard, saying, "My grace is sufficient for you." [Note, Jesus will not say “your works are sufficient”] The faces of the righteous are lighted up, and joy fills every heart. And the angels strike a note higher, and sing again, as they draw still nearer to the earth.

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Hi Life I hope you are having as great a day as I am. The weather is great, I preached in church today, had a really good lunch and now I am responding to a brother in Christ. But the best of all is that Jesus is alive and has saved my ungodly soul 2000 years ago.

I was typing you a response and had good things to share with you and then somehow I hit the backspace and everything just disapeared. This is not the first time this has happened.

I'll give you the short version:

I don't agree with what you wrote. Truth is revealed by God understood by men and the Holy Spirit who gave the truth in the first place is the One who will interpret it to you and I. When men and women die to self and open their temples for the Holy Spirit, they will then rightly divide the truth. (even while you sleep.)

But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. 10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. 11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 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. 1 Cor 2:9-16

Example: Mrs. Joy reads Romans 6:14 and thinks she's free and not under the law. She runs home to Mr Joy and says I am not under the law but under grace. I am calling serveral of my old boyfriends over tonight I miss them, can you make yourself busy at your friends house?

Mrs Joy has not rightly divided the the word of truth but has taken what she read out of context. The Holy Spirit was not in this.

Norman

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

---

Norman said:

Mrs. Joy reads Romans 6:14 and thinks she's free and not under the law. I am calling serveral of my old boyfriends over tonight I miss them, can you make yourself busy at your friends house?

Mrs Joy has not divided the the word of truth but has taken what she read out of context. The Holy Spirit was not in this.

Norman

---

I've never been able to easily determine truth as a result of a given hypothetical circumstance. Nor have I ever seen anyone use the logic, 'Cain rose up and slew Able. Go thou and do likewise.' Mrs Joy allowed interspersing of her conclusions from God, with the voice of the prince of darkness encouraging her to yield to the lust of the flesh as a pretext to avoid self discipline for the sake of the gospel.

Her initial conclusion is still correct. 'she's free and not under the law as a child of God.' However she has made herself a slave again to the flesh by not walking after the Spirit's guidance, until such time as she is given repentance and receives reconciliation with her Father in heaven.

[:"red"] "But now we are discharged from the Law and have terminated all intercourse with it, having died to what once restrained and held us captive. So now we serve not under [obedience to] the old code of written regulations, but [under obedience to the promptings] of the Spirit in newness [of life]. " [/] Romans 7:6 AMP

[:"red"] "Everything is permissible (allowable and lawful) for me; but not all things are helpful (good for me to do, expedient and profitable when considered with other things). Everything is lawful for me, but I will not become the slave of anything or be brought under its power." [/] 1 Corinthians 6:12 AMP

Just thoughts from a man in agreement with you, that my salvation was determined 2,000 years ago by a Man far beyond my comprehension of His willingness to bear long and patiently with the likes of myself.

Peace!

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Ok, here's a real life situation. I am not under the law so I don't have to honor the Sabbath it was for the jews. I hear that I I'm sure you do too.

Come on Life, I know we are not under the law, I'm trying to get to the point about context, quit changing the topic. Everytime I bring up an example to try and talk about context you try to correct me and don't reply to the subject at hand.

You would make a good debater with someone who has a bad short term memory. That used to be me but I lost too many arguments with an old girlfriend to have that used on me.

The formula is: remember what they say and change the peramitters just a bit.

Norman

[cardw]

Quote:

---

Let's step up your analogy just a bit more. Let's say your child is a mature adult...he has reached the age of accountability/reason. Should you force your moral authority on him?

---

As soon as you change it to an adult, it is no longer an analogy. If God kills people for not obeying, that is forcing moral authority.

Quote:

---

God says, "My thoughts are not your thoughts, Neither 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."

---

If this is true then you cannot possibly know what God thinks. That is what fundamentalism in any form claims. It claims to know the thoughts of God.

Quote:

---

God's love is diametrically opposed to our human love. Human love is self-seeking...it loves those who love back. It will do all sort of atrocities in the name of "love."

---

In this and your following thoughts you are claiming to know what God's thoughts are. I find that highly doubtful.

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

---

Norman said:

someone who has a bad short term memory.

Norman

---

That pretty well defines me.

[:"red"] "Whoso is loving transgression is loving debate.... " [/] Proverbs 17:19 YLT

And that pretty well defines my opinion of debate and its' usefulness in carrying forth the great commission.

[:"red"] "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." [/] Matthew 24:14 KJV

No yo-yo forgiveness for those who enter in to the heavenly city.

Keep the faith!

[Robert]

My point is that your analogy is lacking....

When women and men persistently rejected God then He, being love, must back off....He doesn't force Himself on anyone...

As far as children go under the age of accountability...they are nothing more then the life of their parents. They are an extension of the parents. It is the parents that place their kids in danger...not God.

Hence, when God backed off before the flood...when God's Spirit was withdrawn from this world because mankind's thoughts were evil continuously, those parents who rejected the Lord of peace must be made responsible for the death of their children under the age of accountability.

[cardw]

Quote:

---

My point is that your analogy is lacking....

---

My point is that you probably don't understand the analogy.

Quote:

---

When women and men persistently rejected God then He, being love, must back off....He doesn't force Himself on anyone...

---

And killing us or allowing us to die is not forcing His position on us? It basically comes down to agree with God or die.

I believe that it is a myth that people rebel because they are evil. I believe people are destructive because they are mentally ill, afraid and/or ignorant. This is no different than children. Adults are simply under the illusion that they understand what is going on.

Your position is a complex mess of technicalities. Covenants, simplified moral postulates, and myths about a God who goes around killing people is simply too hard for me to swallow. It appears to me that most Christian apologists are simply trying to make sense out of something we would normally consider nonsense if the Bible and God were not attached to it.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

And killing us or allowing us to die is not forcing His position on us?

---

Not at all....For one God doesn't kill. The wages of sin is death....Sin kills...the devil kills, but not God...God is love...He is life. Choose life....

• And the witness is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.

But you don't buy what I say....So why don't you give me your view.

Rob

[cardw]

Quote:

---

Not at all....For one God doesn't kill. The wages of sin is death....Sin kills...the devil kills, but not God...God is love...He is life. Choose life....

---

Who said anything about not choosing life? If God withdraws life support that is killing no matter what the semantics. And how is God being responsible by letting the devil do the killing? My point is that all of this is way too simplistic. The ethical paradoxes should be evidence enough that much of this is nonsense.

Quote:

---

But you don't buy what I say....So why don't you give me your view.

---

We live, we learn, we choose, we make mistakes, we create, we love, we weep, we laugh, we rage, we feel, and we pass on. No judgement.

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Hi Life,

I like discussing just about anything, especially the things of the Lord.

We are going to a family get togther and we'll be back later today. I hope your day is good.

Take care and God bless you.

Norman

[Robert]

Quote:

---

cardw said:

If God withdraws life support that is killing no matter what the semantics. And how is God being responsible by letting the devil do the killing?

---

Disclaimer: [i'm not trying to be crude with my language, I am trying to appeal to common sense]

Wait just a minute, let's back up....God gave Adam dominion over this world, but Adam sold his birthright to Lucifer...hence Lucifer is the rightful owner of this world. In fact Paul calls him, "The lord of this world."

So when someone rebels against God...when someone rejects the God of heaven...the God of selfless agape, love, he is in a nutshell telling God to get the "f" out of his face...."I don't believe in you - get lost!"

A god of compulsion would say "no" - I won't leave you alone....I'll force myself on you no matter what. If that was the case then why in the world create mankind with a free choice...the right to choose?

No...when men persistently reject the God of heaven...when men choose the kingdom of "self" and all its greatness, they are rejecting the God of love. They are saying, "To hell with you...we want Lucifer...he is our god." At that point God can only do the loving thing...not force Himself on the unbeliever.

Robert

[cardw]

Quote:

---

Wait just a minute, let's back up....God gave Adam dominion over this world, but Adam sold his birthright to Lucifer...hence Lucifer is the rightful owner of this world. In fact Paul calls him, "The lord of this world."

---

Based on what court of law?

This would be like the United States giving over the state of California to Saddam Hussain because through some technicality Saddam convinced Arnold to eat some fruit from some tree.

Its totally ridiculous! The whole great controversy scenerio has so many holes in it that to continue on any type of rational basis is impossible.

Quote:

---

So when someone rebels against God...when someone rejects the God of heaven...the God of selfless agape, love, he is in a nutshell telling God to get the "f" out of his face...."I don't believe in you - get lost!"

---

Because I reject your view, doesn't mean I reject God. And the dialog about God does not have to be this severe.

Quote:

---

A god of compulsion would say "no" - I won't leave you alone....I'll force myself on you no matter what. If that was the case then why in the world create mankind with a free choice...the right to choose?

---

This is an exaggeration of God's parenting. We don't have true free choice because we don't have the ability to know all things and therefore we don't know the full ramifications of any particular choice. Free choice would require that we know what we are choosing. And particularly in the area of religion, there is not a lot of evidence in regard to many of the Bible's claims about the after life, who God is, etc.

So unless you have some secret stash of proof that the rest of us don't know about, you are as much in the dark as the rest of us.

Quote:

---

No...when men persistently reject the God of heaven...when men choose the kingdom of "self" and all its greatness, they are rejecting the God of love. They are saying, "To hell with you...we want Lucifer...he is our god." At that point God can only do the loving thing...not force Himself on the unbeliever.

---

No one here is saying they want Lucifer. I don't want a god who is going to kill me unless I agree with him. What gives Lucifer the right to God's unclaimed? How come Lucifer is left alive when it seems pretty clear that he cut the tie to God a long time ago? Again, there are so many holes in this that it is difficult to even hold it together.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

cardw said:

Based on what court of law?

---

• By the principle: "by what a man is overcome, by this he is enslaved."

At creation God gave Adam & Eve "dominion" over all the earth [see Gen 1:28]. When Eve fell to Lucifer’s temptation he enslaved her. Eve's sin was not that she ate some fruit, but by eating it she thought she would become god-like....Her sin was self-seeking.

Adam, although not deceived, was deceived....Adam (filled with agape love) loved Eve more than himself. He was willing to die with Eve....But the sad fact is Adam chose Eve over God.....

Anyway, when Lucifer got Adam and Eve He got the world. They now had natures in tune with His nature of self-seeking. Since we come from Adam we too are born loving self....

Now did Christ ever refute Lucifer's claim to this world? Can you find this in the Bible...? No, but I do find something else! Go to Luke 4:5-8

• And he [Lucifer] led Him [Jesus as man] up and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.

  And the devil said to Him, “I will give You all this domain and its glory; [:"red"]for it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish."[/]

  “Therefore if You worship before me, it shall all be Yours.”

  And Jesus answered and said to him,

  “It is written, This is My world not yours!

  Is that what Jesus said? No! Jesus didn't deny what Lucifer claimed....

  Jesus simply said, "You shall worship the Lord your God and serve Him only.’”

That is why both Paul and Christ call Lucifer the lord or god of this world. He is the president...his principle is seen throughout the world....The results? Death....Hence, the wages of sin is death....

Rob

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

---

cardw said:

we pass on.

---

To what?

Quote:

---

No judgement.

---

Yours! Making you the god of your future.

[:"red"] "Thou hast no other Gods before Me." [/] Exodus 20:3 YLT

[cardw]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

cardw said:

we pass on.

---

To what?

---

Well, I don't know and you certainly don't have any first hand knowledge.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

No judgement.

---

Yours! Making you the god of your future.

---

Well, you seem very willing to pass judgement on me. So are you claiming to be my god?